Cooled transurethral microwave thermotherapy for intractable chronic prostatitis--results of a pilot study after 1 year

Therapeutic interventions to urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome and UPOINT system for clinical phenotyping: How far are we?

The assessment and management of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndrome (UCPPS), is controversial. It is classified by voiding symptoms, pelvic pain, and bladder pain, which is weekly treated, weekly understood, and bothersome. In the aspect of clinical efforts and research to help people with this syndrome have been hampered by the deficiency of a widely reliable, accepted, and a valuable tool to evaluate the patient symptoms and quality of life (QoL) impact. However, the etiology comes into sight is multifactorial, and available treatment options have been imprecise considerably in present years. We compiled the published literature on the assessment of the syndrome, a tentative role of pharmacological and non-pharmacological (conservative, alternative, and invasive therapy) interventions in eradicating the disease as well as improving symptoms. The previously published literature on animal models has established the association of immune systems in the etiology, pathogenesis, and progression of the disease. The UPOINT system for clinical phenotyping of UCPPS patients has six predefined domains that direct multimodal therapy, which would lead to significant symptom improvement in the medical field. The narrative review aims to scrutinize the fluctuating scientist's views on the evaluation of patient and multimodal treatment of the UPOINT system.

Nonablative transurethral Erbium:YAG laser treatment for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A prospective comparative study

Aims

This prospective study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between the use of Erbium:YAG (Er:YAG) laser in a nonablative mode, to the use of the pharmacological treatment of oral tadalafil for the treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

Methods

The laser group received two sessions of Erbium:YAG laser, administered intraurethrally in a long, nonablative train of long pulses (SMOOTH™ mode), applied at the level of the male prostatic urethra. Tadalafil group received oral tadalafil at a dose of 5 mg/day, consecutively for 2 months. Effectiveness was assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire, VAS (visual analogue scale) pain score, and maximum urethral flow at follow‐up visits up to 12 months after initiating treatment. Adverse effects were recorded after each treatment and follow‐up sessions.

Results

The results show a significant decrease in the IPSS score in both groups up to the 12‐month follow‐up. The increase in Q‐max was evident up to 3‐months follow‐up in the tadalafil group and up to 6 months in the laser group. The decrease in the VAS pain score was also significant in both treatment groups, lasting up to 3 months in the tadalafil group and up to 6 months in the laser group.

Conclusions

The nonablative Er:YAG SMOOTH™ laser seems to be a promising treatment for this widely occurring condition. More studies are needed to confirm its safety and efficacy.

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017. We included randomized controlled trials in men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions. Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods. The primary outcomes were prostatitis symptoms and adverse events. The secondary outcomes were sexual dysfunction, urinary symptoms, quality of life, anxiety and depression.

RESULTS

We included 38 unique studies in 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons, reporting outcomes mostly at short-term follow-up. Our analysis showed that acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with a sham procedure (mean difference [MD] in total National Institutes of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index [NIH-CPSI] score -5.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.32 to -4.26, moderate QoE). Acupuncture may result in little or no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). Lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE), but we found no information regarding adverse events. A physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE), but we found no information regarding adverse events. It was uncertain whether prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE) and we found no information regarding adverse events. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE), but these results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). Transrectal thermotherapy, alone or in combination with medical therapy, may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings with moderate to high QoE, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions, such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy, are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods, including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture probably leads to clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture may result in little to no difference in adverse events (low QoE). Acupuncture may not reduce sexual dysfunction when compared with sham procedure (MD in the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) Scale -0.50, 95% CI -3.46 to 2.46, low QoE). Acupuncture may also lead to a clinically meaningful reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, low QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.2. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.3. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). This programme may not reduce anxiety or depression (low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction or quality of life.4. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events, sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.5. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE). This treatment probably improves sexual dysfunction (MD in the IIEF Scale MD 3.34, 95% CI 2.68 to 4.00, one study, 60 participants, moderate QoE). We found no information regarding quality of life, depression or anxiety.6. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events. We found no information regarding sexual dysfunction, quality of life, depression or anxiety.7. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of most of the other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of moderate quality evidence, this review found that some non-pharmacological interventions such as acupuncture and extracorporeal shockwave therapy are likely to result in a decrease in prostatitis symptoms and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse event. The QoE for most other comparisons was predominantly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.

Non-pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common disorder in which the two main clinical features are pelvic pain and lower urinary tract symptoms. There are currently many approaches for its management, using both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. The National Institute of Health - Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score is a validated measure commonly used to measure CP/CPPS symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of non-pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS).

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status. The date of the latest search of all databases was August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies, performed statistical analyses and rated quality of evidence (QoE) according to the GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 unique studies with 3290 men with CP/CPPS across 23 comparisons.1. Acupuncture: (three studies, 204 participants) based on short-term follow-up, acupuncture reduces prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with sham procedure (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.32 to -4.26, high QoE). Acupuncture likely results in little to no difference in adverse events (moderate QoE). It probably also decreases prostatitis symptoms compared with standard medical therapy in an appreciable number of participants (MD -6.05, 95% CI -7.87 to -4.24, two studies, 78 participants, moderate QoE).2. Circumcision: (one study, 713 participants) based on short-term follow-up, early circumcision probably decreases prostatitis symptoms slightly (NIH-CPSI score MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.82 to -2.18, moderate QoE) and may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with control (a waiting list to be circumcised, low QoE).3. Electromagnetic chair: (two studies, 57 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain of the effects of the use of an electromagnetic chair on prostatitis symptoms. It may be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events compared with sham procedure (low to very low QoE).4. Lifestyle modifications: (one study, 100 participants) based on short-term follow-up, lifestyle modifications may be associated with a greater improvement in prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number of participants compared with control (risk ratio (RR) for improvement in NIH-CPSI scores 3.90, 95% CI 2.20 to 6.92, very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.5. Physical activity: (one study, 85 participants) based on short-term follow-up, a physical activity programme may cause a small reduction in prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -4.69 to -0.31, low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.6. Prostatic massage: (two studies, 115 participants) based on short-term follow-up, we are uncertain whether the prostatic massage reduces or increases prostatitis symptoms compared with control (very low QoE). We found no information regarding adverse events.7. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy: (three studies, 157 participants) based on short-term follow-up, extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduces prostatitis symptoms compared with control (NIH-CPSI score MD -6.18, 95% CI -7.46 to -4.89, high QoE). These results may not be sustained at medium-term follow-up (low QoE). This treatment may not be associated with a greater incidence of adverse events (low QoE).8. Transrectal thermotherapy compared to medical therapy: (two studies, 237 participants) based on short-term follow-up, transrectal thermotherapy alone or in combination with medical therapy may decrease prostatitis symptoms slightly when compared with medical therapy alone (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.82 to -1.18, low QoE). One included study reported that participants may experience transient adverse events.9. Other interventions: there is uncertainty about the effects of other interventions included in this review. We found no information regarding psychological support or prostatic surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some of the interventions can decrease prostatitis symptoms in an appreciable number without a greater incidence of adverse events. The QoE was mostly low. Future clinical trials should include a full report of their methods including adequate masking, consistent assessment of all patient-important outcomes including potential treatment-related adverse events and appropriate sample sizes.

Male chronic pelvic pain: An update

INTRODUCTION

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome collectively referred to as urologic CPPS (UCPPS) is defined by the absence of identifiable bacterial infection as a cause for the chronic pain and urinary symptoms.

METHODS

A PubMed search of all recent relevant articles using the keywords/phrases: CPPS, CPPS, and male pelvic pain, was conducted.

RESULTS

CPPS has a high worldwide prevalence and its negative impact on quality of life compares with or exceeds common chronic morbidities. Triggers include certain comestibles as well as psychosocial factors that promote catastrophizing and illness focused behavior. Several validated tools are currently available to help diagnose and direct targeted therapy. Treatment should begin with the most simple and least invasive based on the presenting clinical phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no gold-standard treatment exists, a multidisciplinary approach with multimodal therapy gives the UCPPS patient the best chance of symptom relief.

Acupuncture relieves symptoms in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a randomized, sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There are multiple approaches to the management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS); and lately the data suggesting the ability of acupuncture treatment to decrease pain, positively impact quality of life and potentially modulate inflammation has suggested it as a potential therapeutic option for men with CP/CPPS. We conducted this study to determine whether acupuncture is really an effective therapeutic modality for CP/CPPS in terms of >50% decrease in total National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score from baseline compared with sham.

METHODS

One hundred patients with CP/CPPS (category III B) in an outpatient urology clinic were randomized to receive acupuncture at either seven acupoints bilaterally or sham points adjacent to these points. NIH-CPSI was completed by each patient before and 6, 8, 16, 24 weeks after the treatment. Mean values of total CPSI score and subscores after the treatment and on follow-up following the treatment were compared.

RESULTS

Of the acupuncture participants, 92% were NIH-CPSI responders (>50% decrease in total NIH-CPSI score from baseline) compared with 48% of sham participants, 8 weeks after the end of the therapy. Both groups experienced significant decrease in CPSI subscores throughout the whole follow-up period; however, the decline remained significantly greater in the active acupuncture group as compared with the sham group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the use of acupuncture in treatment of men with CP/CPPS symptoms resulted in a significant decrease in total NIH-CPSI scores.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a consensus guideline

Objectives

To improve awareness and recognition of chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) among non‐specialists and patients. To provide guidance to healthcare professionals treating patients with CBP and CP/CPPS, in both non‐specialist and specialist settings. To promote efficient referral of care between non‐specialists and specialists and the involvement of the multidisciplinary team (MDT).

Patients and Methods

The guideline population were men with CBP or CP/CPPS (persistent or recurrent symptoms and no other urogenital pathology for ≥3 of the previous 6 months). Consensus recommendations for the guidelines were based on a search to identify literature on the diagnosis and management of CBP and CP/CPPS (published between 1999 and February 2014). A Delphi panel process was used where high‐quality, published evidence was lacking.

Results

CBP and CP/CPPS can present with a wide range of clinical manifestations. The four main symptom domains are urogenital pain, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS – voiding or storage symptoms), psychological issues and sexual dysfunction. Patients should be managed according to their individual symptom pattern. Options for first‐line treatment include antibiotics, α‐adrenergic antagonists (if voiding LUTS are present) and simple analgesics. Repeated use of antibiotics, such as quinolones, should be avoided if there is no obvious symptomatic benefit from infection control or cultures do not support an infectious cause. Early use of treatments targeting neuropathic pain and/or referral to specialist services should be considered for patients who do not respond to initial measures. An MDT approach (urologists, pain specialists, nurse specialists, specialist physiotherapists, general practitioners, cognitive behavioural therapists/psychologists, and sexual health specialists) is recommended. Patients should be fully informed about the possible underlying causes and treatment options, including an explanation of the chronic pain cycle.

Conclusion

Chronic prostatitis can present with a wide variety of signs and symptoms. Identification of individual symptom patterns and a symptom‐based treatment approach are recommended. Further research is required to evaluate management options for CBP and CP/CPPS.

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a clinical enigma

Chronic nonbacterial prostatitis is an ill-defined, painful clinical condition that is characterized by various nonspecific symptoms, some of which are related to urination or the male reproductive organs. Urologists diagnose this particular condition when the symptoms are not associated with urinary bacterial growth before and after transrectal prostate massage. In this review, we describe the recommended and optional tests that can be performed in these cases. There is significant overlap between chronic nonbacterial prostatitis and other unexplained pain conditions, raising the question as to whether the prostate is the culprit. The sources and mediators of pain and the psychological aspects of this complex condition are discussed. Treatments consist of traditional antibiotics and α-blockers. Because the pain relief is often temporary, patients seek other solutions. Various therapeutics have been introduced to satisfy the expectations of patients and physicians. We discuss other pain medications, as well as intraprostatic drug injections and shockwave therapy. Importantly, however, not all of these suggestions have been widely accepted by urologists or pain clinics.

Therapeutic efficacy of bipolar radiofrequency thermotherapy for patients with chronic prostatitis: a retrospective analysis of 26 cases

PURPOSE

Chronic prostatitis (CP) does not yet have a universally successful therapy. Alternative treatments including thermotherapy have been adopted in the multimodal management of pain and voiding dysfunction. We retrospectively analyzed the therapeutic efficacy of bipolar radiofrequency thermotherapy for patients who were unsatisfied with conventional medication for CP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study between October 2009 and September 2010 of 26 patients who were under 50 years old and diagnosed with CP (National Institutes of Health [NIH]-category III) was performed. Twenty patients were diagnosed with inflammatory CP (NIH-category IIIa) and the rest with noninflammatory CP (NIH-category IIIb). We used the Tempro system at an intraprostatic temperature of 55℃ for 50 minutes with a medium heating rate. All patients also completed the NIH-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (CPSI) before and after treatment.

RESULTS

In the patients diagnosed with CP, the mean serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 0.9±0.3 ng/ml, the prostate volume was 27.1±5.5 g, and the average score for all 3 domains on the NIH-CPSI significantly decreased. The total scores decreased from 19.8±7.1 to 11.1±7.0, the pain domain decreased from 8.6±3.1 to 4.8±3.1, the voiding symptom domain decreased from 5.1±1.8 to 2.9±1.8, and the effect on the quality of life decreased from 6.1±2.2 to 3.4±2.2 (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar radiofrequency thermotherapy for patients with CP intractable to conventional medication can provide significant improvement in the NIH-CPSI. Large, randomized controlled trials will also be required to confirm the efficacy of this therapy.

The effects of transrectal radiofrequency hyperthermia on patients with chronic prostatitis and the changes of MDA, NO, SOD, and Zn levels in pretreatment and posttreatment

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of transrectal radiofrequency hyperthermia (TRFH) in 159 patients with chronic prostatitis (CP) and explore the changes of reactive oxygen species in CP patients pretreatment and posttreatment.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with CP were randomized to 6 weeks of tamsulosin plus clarithromycin, TRFH, or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group. The primary outcome measure was evaluated by the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index. Malondiadehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and nitrogen monoxide (NO) were measured by biochemical assay. Zinc (Zn) content was assayed by atomical spectrophotography.

RESULTS

All 105 patients in the TRFH or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group showed statistically significant improvement of pain, quality of life, and micturition domains compared with the tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group. Regardless of type IIIa or type IIIb CP, there was a significant improvement in the TRFH or TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group compared with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group (P<.05). Compared with pretreatment, MDA, NO, and Zn were decreased in type II and IIIa, whereas SOD was only increased significantly in type II (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study reveals TRFH as an effective therapy option for CP, especially type IIIa or type IIIb CP. The results of TRFH with tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group was superior to the TRFH group or the tamsulosin plus clarithromycin group alone. In comparison with pretreatment, differences in reactive oxygen species levels and Zn in CP patients suggest that these factors could be used as a biomarker to evaluate the symptoms of CP and the effects of treatment.

[Specific treatments for chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To review the treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature was performed by searching the Medline database (National Library of Medicine). Search terms were either Medical subject heading (MeSH) keywords (antibacterial agents, pelvic pain, placebos, prostatitis, treatment) or terms derived from the title or abstract. Search terms were used alone or in combinations by using the "AND" operator. The literature search was conducted from 1990 to the present time.

RESULTS

The treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis is based on the use of antibiotics, primarily fluoroquinolones, for 4 to 6 weeks, but no consensus has been reached concerning the standard treatment of CP/CPPS. A review of the literature failed to identify any recognized and validated treatments for CP/CPPS, but several conclusions can be drawn: placebo gives satisfactory results in a considerable number of patients; antibiotics are not recommended; alpha-blocking agents may be effective in recently diagnosed, previously untreated patients, provided they are prescribed for 12 weeks to 6 months; invasive surgery of the prostate and bladder neck is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

Progress in the treatment of CP/CPPS will require more extensive basic and clinical research. Only randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials including a large number of patients, and using the NIH-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index questionnaire (NIH-CPSI) as evaluation tool will be able to provide reliable conclusions. The use of patient subgroups selected according to the predominant symptoms could be contributive.

New treatments for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a common condition among men of a wide age range, with detrimental effects on quality of life. The etiology, pathogenesis, and optimal treatment of CP/CPPS remain unknown, although progress has been made in these domains in recent years. A wide variety of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies have been studied in clinical trials, but most have shown limited efficacy in symptom alleviation. CP/CPPS is increasingly viewed as a condition that involves variable degrees of neuropathic pain. Medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, memantine, and tricyclic antidepressants are often used in other neuropathic pain conditions and, therefore, are considered potential treatments for CP/CPPS. Few studies of these agents in patients with CP/CPPS have been reported, but future clinical trials should help to determine their utility and to characterize the pathogenetic mechanisms of pain in CP/CPPS. Combining treatment trials with biomarker, genomic, and imaging studies, in addition to epidemiologic and symptom-based assessments, will maximize the ability to probe disease etiology and pathogenesis, as well as identify effective treatment.

Chronic prostatitis: management strategies

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has redefined prostatitis into four distinct entities. Category I is acute bacterial prostatitis. It is an acute prostatic infection with a uropathogen, often with systemic symptoms of fever, chills and hypotension. The treatment hinges on antimicrobials and drainage of the bladder because the inflamed prostate may block urinary flow. Category II prostatitis is called chronic bacterial prostatitis. It is characterized by recurrent episodes of documented urinary tract infections with the same uropathogen and causes pelvic pain, urinary symptoms and ejaculatory pain. It is diagnosed by means of localization cultures that are 90% accurate in localizing the source of recurrent infections within the lower urinary tract. Asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis comprises NIH category IV. This entity is, by definition, asymptomatic and is often diagnosed incidentally during the evaluation of infertility or prostate cancer. The clinical significance of category IV prostatitis is unknown and it is often left untreated. Category III prostatitis is called chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). It is characterized by pelvic pain for more than 3 of the previous 6 months, urinary symptoms and painful ejaculation, without documented urinary tract infections from uropathogens. The syndrome can be devastating, affecting 10-15% of the male population, and results in nearly 2 million outpatient visits each year. The aetiology of CP/CPPS is poorly understood, but may be the result of an infectious or inflammatory initiator that results in neurological injury and eventually results in pelvic floor dysfunction in the form of increased pelvic muscle tone. The diagnosis relies on separating this entity from chronic bacterial prostatitis. If there is no history of documented urinary tract infections with a urinary tract pathogen, then cultures should be taken when patients are symptomatic. Prostatic localization cultures, called the Meares-Stamey 4 glass test, would identify the prostate as the source for a urinary tract infection in chronic bacterial prostatitis. If there is no infection, then the patient is likely to have CP/CPPS. For healthcare providers, the focus of therapy is symptomatic relief. The first therapeutic measure is often a 4- to 6-week course of a fluoroquinolone, which provides relief in 50% of men and is more efficacious if prescribed soon after symptoms begin. Second-line pharmacotherapy involves anti-inflammatory agents for pain symptoms and alpha-adrenergic receptor antagonists (alpha-blockers) for urinary symptoms. Potentially more effective is pelvic floor training/biofeedback, but randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this. Third-line agents include 5alpha-reductase inhibitors, glycosaminoglycans, quercetin, cernilton (CN-009) and saw palmetto. For treatment refractory patients, surgical interventions can be offered. Transurethral microwave therapy to ablate prostatic tissue has shown some promise. The treatment algorithm provided in this review involves a 4- to 6-week course of antibacterials, which may be repeated if the initial course provides relief. Pain and urinary symptoms can be ameliorated with anti-inflammatories and alpha-blockers. If the relief is not significant, then patients should be referred for biofeedback. Minimally invasive surgical options should be reserved for treatment-refractory patients.

Update on minimally invasive therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Once primary treatment fails, the diverse causes and symptoms of chronic pelvic pain syndrome require clinicians to consider several secondary approaches. Multimodal therapy addresses unique symptoms and targets illness origin. However, once medical modalities fail, minimally invasive therapies should be considered, including transurethral needle ablation hyperthermia, cooled thermotherapy, electromagnetic chair, prostatic massage, and intraprostatic botulinum toxin A injection. Low evidence levels exist for all approaches, but we anticipate promising results of larger trials for cooled thermotherapy and look forward to the emergence of experimental techniques using botulinum toxin A.

[Urethral syndrome in men--chronic pelvic pain syndrome]

INTRODUCTION

Chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) is defined as pelvis minor pain of nonmalignant nature repeating in different time intervals. Urethral syndrome (US) represents a most poorly defined entity within CPPS.

OBJECTIVE

The estimation of US influence on quality-of-life as well as the determination of the way of treatment and therapy optimal length.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective one-year study included 166 men with CPPS, median age of 54 years; they were monitored clinically. During the patient monitoring the NIH-CPSI questionnaire (National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatis Symptom Index) was used. US was diagnosed in 79 patients (47%), and according to the most intensive pain localization they were divided into three groups. All the patients were treated with alpha adrenergic blockers and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and the treatment of the patients with positive urethral smear also included antibiotherapy. The values of total NIH-CPSI, as well as of its individual components were analyzed after three and six months of treatment.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The therapy application had a significant influence on the decrease of total NIH-CPSI--23.3% (p < 0.01), pain symptoms (p < 0.0) and urinary difficulties (p < 0.01), and the point values of quality-of-life score were diminished by 0.7 to 1.9 points depending on the group of those monitored (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicated a significant influence of CPPS on quality-of-life and a necessity of a serious approach to patients and their treatment.

Treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Acceptance of the National Institutes of Health definition of Category III Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS) and the development and validation of the Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index has stimulated significant research into treatment of this condition. Evidence-based suggestions for treatment include the following. (i) Antimicrobials cannot be recommended for men with longstanding, previously treated CP/CPPS. (ii) Alpha-blockers can be recommended as first-line medical therapy, particularly in alpha-blocker-naïve men with moderately severe symptoms who have relatively recent onset of symptoms. (iii) Alpha-blockers cannot be recommended in men with longstanding CP/CPPS who have tried and failed alpha-blockers in the past. And (iv) anti-inflammatory therapy, finasteride and pentosan polysulfate are not recommended as primary treatment; however, they may have a useful adjunctive role in a multimodal therapeutic regimen. Early data on herbal therapies, particularly quercetin and cernilton, are intriguing, but larger multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trials are required before a high level of evidence recommendation can be made on its use. At this time, surgery (including minimally invasive) is recommended only for definitive indications and not generally for CP/CPPS.