Serenoa repens for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a non-malignant enlargement of the prostate, which can lead to obstructive and irritative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The pharmacologic use of plants and herbs (phytotherapy) for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH is common. The extract of the berry of the American saw palmetto or dwarf palm plant, Serenoa repens (SR), which is also known by its botanical name of Sabal serrulatum, is one of several phytotherapeutic agents available for the treatment of BPH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Serenoa repens in the treatment of men with LUTS consistent with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and LILACS), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 16 September 2022, with no restrictions on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of participants with BPH who were treated with Serenoa repens or placebo/no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion at each stage and undertook data extraction and risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. We considered review outcomes measured up to 12 months after randomization as short term, and beyond 12 months as long term. Our main outcomes included urologic symptom scores, quality of life, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, we narrowed the review question to only comparisons with placebo. We included 27 studies (of which 9 were new) involving a total of 4656 participants, 19 studies comparing Serenoa repens with placebo, and 8 studies comparing Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapeutic agents versus placebo. Most studies included men aged > 50 (mean age range 52 to 68) with moderate urologic symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] range 8 to 19). Ten studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry; two studies were funded by government agencies; and the remaining studies did not specify funding sources. Serenoa repens versus placebo or no intervention Results for this comparison are based on predefined sensitivity analyses limited to studies at low risk of bias. Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in urologic symptoms at short-term follow-up (3 to 6 months; IPSS score range 0 to 35, higher scores indicate worse symptoms; mean difference (MD) -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.74 to -0.07; I2 = 68%; 9 studies, 1681 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in the quality of life at short-term follow-up (3 to 6 months; IPSS quality of life domain range 0 to 6, higher scores indicate worse quality of life; MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.00; I2 = 39%; 5 studies, 1001 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (1 to 17 months; risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.31; I2 = 18%; 12 studies, 2399 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on 164 cases per 1000 men in the placebo group, this corresponds to 2 more (38 fewer to 51 more) per 1000 men in the Serenoa repens group. Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in urologic symptoms at long-term follow-up (12 to 17 months, IPSS score, MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.88; I2 = 34%; 3 studies, 898 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in quality of life at long-term follow-up (12 to 17 months, IPSS quality of life, MD -0.11, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.19; I2 = 65%; 3 studies, 882 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were no data on long-term adverse events for this comparison. Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapy versus placebo or no intervention Different phytotherapeutic agents that include Serenoa repens may result in little to no difference in urologic symptoms compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (12 to 24 weeks, IPSS score, MD -2.41, 95% CI -4.54 to -0.29; I2 = 67%; 4 studies, 460 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effects of these agents on quality of life (very low-certainty evidence). These agents may result in little to no difference in the occurrence of adverse events; however, the CIs included substantial benefits and harms (12 to 48 weeks, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.41; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 481 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 132 cases per 1000 men in the placebo group, this corresponds to 12 fewer (55 fewer to 54 more) per 1000 men in the combined phytotherapeutic agents with Serenoa repens group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serenoa repens alone provides little to no benefits for men with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement. There is more uncertainty about the role of Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapeutic agents.

Role of Phytotherapy in the Management of BPH: A Summary of the Literature

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) describes the non-malignant enlargement of the prostate. It is both common and growing in incidence. Treatment is multimodal, involving conservative, medical, and surgical interventions. This review aims to examine the evidence base for phytotherapies, specifically analyzing their role in treating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributable to BPH. A literature search was completed, specifically looking for randomized control trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews involving phytotherapy treating BPH. Specific emphasis was placed on exploring substance origin, the proposed mechanism of action, evidence of efficacy, and the side-effect profile. Several phytotherapeutic agents were evaluated. These included serenoa repens, cucurbita pepo, and pygeum Africanum, among others. For most of the reviewed substances, only modest effectiveness was reported. Generally, though, all treatments were tolerated well with minimal side effects. None of the treatments discussed in this paper form part of the recommended treatment algorithm in either European or American guidelines. We, therefore, conclude that phytotherapies, in the treatment of LUTS attributable to BPH, do provide a convenient option for patients, with minimal side effects. At present, however, the evidence for the usage of phytotherapy in BPH is inconclusive, with some agents having more backing than others. This remains an expansive field of urology whereby there is still more research to be done.

Serenoa repens and Urtica dioica Fixed Combination: In-Vitro Validation of a Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is an age-related chronic disorder, characterized by the hyperproliferation of prostatic epithelial and stromal cells, which drives prostate enlargement. Since BPH aetiology and progression have been associated with the persistence of an inflammatory stimulus, induced both by Nuclear Factor-kappa B (NF-κB) activation and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, the inhibition of these pathways could result in a good tool for its clinical treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity of a combined formulation of Serenoa repens and Urtica dioica (SR/UD) in an in vitro human model of BPH. The results confirmed both the antioxidant and the anti-inflammatory effects of SR/UD. In fact, SR/UD simultaneously reduced ROS production, NF-κB translocation inside the nucleus, and, consequently, interleukin 6 (IL-6) and interleukin 8 (IL-8) production. Furthermore, the effect of SR/UD was also tested in a human androgen-independent prostate cell model, PC3. SR/UD did not show any significant antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effect, but was able to reduce NF-κB translocation. Taken together, these results suggested a promising role of SR/UD in BPH and BPH-linked disorder prevention.

A review of the most important natural antioxidants and effective medicinal plants in traditional medicine on prostate cancer and its disorders

Herbal plants can be used to treat and prevent life-threatening diseases, such as prostate cancer, infections and other diseases. The findings from traditional medicine and the use of medicinal plants can help control and treat most problems due to prostate diseases. The aim of this study was to identify and report the most important medicinal plants that affect prostate disorders. Based on the results of the review of numerous articles indexed in the databases ISI, Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, etc., a number of plants have been reported to be used in the treatment and prevention of diseases, inflammation, infection, and cancer of the prostate gland. The plants include Panax ginseng, Arum palaestinum, Melissa officinalis, Syzygium paniculatum, Coptis chinensis, Embelia ribes, Scutellaria baicalensis, Tripterygium wilfordii, Salvia triloba, Ocimum tenuiflorum, Psidium guajava, Ganoderma lucidum, Litchi chinensis, Saussurea costus, Andrographis paniculata, Magnolia officinalis and Prunus africana. Phytochemical investigations have examined the therapeutic effects of medicinal plants effective on prostate cancer and their possible mechanisms of action and clinical effects as well as the use of active flavonoids in production of herbal drugs. Due to the active ingredients and important flavonoids of these plants, they can be used in production of herbal drugs that prevent and treat infections, inflammation and cancer of the prostate gland, and reduce the metastasis of prostate cancer cells, reducing the patients’ suffering and pain.

Can We Clinically Distinguish Anejaculation From Retrograde Ejaculation in Patients on α1A-Blockers Therapy for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms?

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the physiopathology of ejaculatory disorders (EjD) and discriminate between retrograde ejaculation (REj) and anejaculation (AEj) induced by α1A-blockers, through the association between the mean postorgasm seminal vesicle volume and the presence of sperm in midstream urine, in patients with moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic enlargement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Therapy-naïve male patients with LUTS and without previous EjD were treated with α1A-blockers. Pre- and post-treatment EjD were investigated through question 4 of the 4-item Male Sexual Function questionnaire and the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF). After 12 weeks, postorgasm urine was collected for sperm count and seminal vesicle volume was calculated through transrectal ultrasound.

RESULTS

All 42 patients reported with EjD after treatment with α1A-blockers: 4-item Male Sexual Function questionnaire and MSHQ-EjD-SF Q4 scores were significantly higher (P <.001) and MSHQ-EjD-SF Q1-3 score was significantly lower (P <.001) than before. Postorgasm seminal vesicle volume was significantly higher in patients with postorgasm sperm-negative urine (AEj), and lower in patients with postorgasm sperm-positive urine (REj; P <.001).

CONCLUSION

We clearly demonstrated an association between the presence of sperm in the midstream urine and seminal vesicle volume after orgasm, strongly confirming and differentiating the hypothesis of a dual etiology for EjD (REj vs AEj) secondary to α1A-blockers therapy for LUTS.

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. We considered a 25% decrease of NIH-CPSI baseline score or a six-point reduction as MCID.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological therapies for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 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 July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were men with a diagnosis of CP/CPPS. We included all available pharmacological interventions compared to placebo or in head-to-head comparisons.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence (QoE) using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 unique studies in 9119 men with CP/CPPS, with assessments of 16 types of pharmacological interventions. Unless stated otherwise, our comparisons were based on short-term follow-up (less than 12 months). Most studies did not specify their funding sources; 21 studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies.1. Alpha blockers: (24 studies, 2061 participants). We are uncertain about the effects of these drugs on prostatitis symptoms when compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) in total NIH-CPSI score -5.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.41 to -2.61; 18 studies, 1524 participants, very low QoE) and at long-term follow-up (MD -5.60, 95% CI -10.89 to -0.32; 4 studies, 235 participants, very low QoE). Alpha blockers may be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events, such as dizziness and postural hypotension (risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.34; 19 studies, 1588 participants; low QoE). Alpha blockers probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction, quality of life and anxiety and depression (moderate to low QoE).2. 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI): (2 studies, 177 participants). Finasteride probably reduces prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -4.60, 95% CI -5.43 to -3.77; 1 study, 64 participants; moderate QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.3. Antibiotics: (6 studies, 693 participants). Antibiotics (quinolones) may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI score MD -2.43, 95% CI -4.72 to -0.15; 5 studies, 372 participants; low QoE) and are probably not associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (moderate QoE). Antibiotics probably result in little to no difference in sexual dysfunction and quality of life (moderate QoE). There was no information on anxiety or depression.4. Anti-inflammatories: (7 studies, 585 participants). Anti-inflammatories may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -2.50, 95% CI -3.74 to -1.26; 7 studies, 585 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.5. Phytotherapy: (7 studies, 551 participants). Phytotherapy may reduce prostatitis symptoms compared to placebo (NIH-CPSI scores MD -5.02, 95% CI -6.81 to -3.23; 5 studies, 320 participants; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). Phytotherapy may not improve sexual dysfunction (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life or anxiety and depression.6. Botulinum toxin A (BTA): Intraprostatic BTA injection (1 study, 60 participants) may cause a large reduction in prostatitis symptom (NIH-CPSI scores MD -25.80, 95% CI -30.15 to -21.45), whereas pelvic floor muscle BTA injection (1 study, 29 participants) may not reduce prostatitis symptoms (low QoE). Both comparisons used a placebo injection. These interventions may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.7. Allopurinol: (2 studies, 110 participants). Allopurinol may result in little to no difference in prostatitis symptoms and adverse events when compared to placebo (low QoE). There was no information on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression.8. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM): (7 studies, 835 participants); TCM may reduce prostatitis symptoms (NIH-CPSI score, MD -3.13, 95% CI -4.99 to -1.28; low QoE) and may not be associated with an increased incidence in adverse events (low QoE). TCM probably does not improve sexual dysfunction (moderate QoE) and may not improve symptoms of anxiety and depression (low QoE). There was no information on quality of life.The most frequent reasons for downgrading the QoE were study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision. We found few trials with active comparators.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to very low-quality evidence that alpha blockers, antibiotics, 5-ARI, anti-inflammatories, phytotherapy, intraprostatic BTA injection, and traditional Chinese medicine may cause a reduction in prostatitis symptoms without an increased incidence of adverse events in the short term, except for alpha blockers which may be associated with an increase in mild adverse events. We found few trials with active comparators and little evidence of the effects of these drugs on sexual dysfunction, quality of life or anxiety and depression. 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.

The andrologist's contribution to a better life for ageing men: part 2

The long-term intake of a judiciously composed nutriceutical containing low-dose vitamins, antioxidants, minerals and particular herbal preparations seems justified for older persons who take medication, or who consume an unbalanced diet, or who are exposed to environmental toxins. Recent reports suggest these nutriceuticals may delay age-related diseases and the occurrence of cancer, and reduce mortality in apparently healthy ageing men. Food supplementation with a nutriceutical that was formulated particularly for ageing men should result in an increase of at least one quality-adjusted life year and may lower the financial and social burden of disease in elderly people.

Serenoa repens for benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a nonmalignant enlargement of the prostate, which can lead to obstructive and irritative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The pharmacologic use of plants and herbs (phytotherapy) for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH is common. The extract of the berry of the American saw palmetto, or dwarf palm plant, Serenoa repens (SR), which is also known by its botanical name of Sabal serrulatum, is one of several phytotherapeutic agents available for the treatment of BPH.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to assess the effects and harms of Serenoa repens in the treatment of men with LUTS consistent with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for trials in general and in specialized databases, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE®, EMBASE, CINAHL®, Web of Science, SCOPUS, BIOSIS Previews®, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-Trials.com, World Health Organization (WHO), and Google Scholar. We also handsearched systematic reviews, references, and clinical practice guidelines. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were eligible if they randomized men with symptomatic BPH to receive preparations of SR (alone or in combination) for at least four weeks in comparison with placebo or other interventions, and included clinical outcomes, such as urologic symptom scales, symptoms, and urodynamic measurements. Eligibility was assessed by at least two independent observers (JT, RM).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author (JT) extracted Information on patients, interventions, and outcomes which was then checked by another review author (RM). The main outcome measure for comparing the effectiveness of SR with active or inert controls was change in urologic symptom-scale scores, with validated scores taking precedence over non validated ones. Secondary outcomes included changes in nocturia and urodynamic measures. The main outcome measure for harms was the number of men reporting side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

In a meta-analysis of two high quality long-term trials (n = 582), Serenoa repens therapy was not superior to placebo in reducing LUTS based on the AUA (mean difference (MD) 0.25 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.58 to 1.07). A 72 week trial with high quality evidence, using the American Urological Association Symptom Score Index, reported that SR was not superior to placebo at double and triple doses. In the same trial the proportions of clinical responders (≥ three-point improvement) were nearly identical (42.6% and 44.2% for SR and placebo, respectively), and not significant (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.22).This update, which did not change our previous conclusions, included two new trials with 444 additional men, an 8.5% (5666/5222) increase from our 2009 updated review, and a 28.8% (1988/1544) increase for our main comparison, SR monotherapy versus placebo control (17 trials). Overall, 5666 men were assessed from 32 randomized, controlled trials, with trial lengths from four to 72 weeks. Twenty-seven trials were double blinded and treatment allocation concealment was adequate in 14.In a trial of high quality evidence (N = 369), versus placebo, SR did not significantly decrease nightly urination on the AUA Nocturia scale (range zero to five) at 72 weeks follow-up (one-sided P = 0.19).The three high quality, moderate-to-long term trials found peak urine flow was not improved with Serenoa repens compared with placebo (MD 0.40 mL/s, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.09).Comparing prostate size (mean change from baseline), one high quality 12-month trial (N = 225) reported no significant difference between SR and placebo (MD -1.22 cc, 95% CI -3.91 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serenoa repens, at double and triple doses, did not improve urinary flow measures or prostate size in men with lower urinary tract symptoms consistent with BPH.

Serenoa repens for benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), a nonmalignant enlargement of the prostate, can lead to obstructive and irritative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The pharmacologic use of plants and herbs (phytotherapy) for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH is common. The extract of the berry of the American saw palmetto, or dwarf palm plant, Serenoa repens (also known by its botanical name of Sabal serrulatum), is one of several phytotherapeutic agents available for the treatment of BPH.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of Serenoa repens in the treatment of LUTS consistent with BPH.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were searched in computerized general and specialized databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library), by checking bibliographies, and by handsearching the relevant literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were eligible if they (1) randomized men with symptomatic BPH to receive preparations of Serenoa repens (alone or in combination) for at least four weeks in comparison with placebo or other interventions, and (2) included clinical outcomes such as urologic symptom scales, symptoms, and urodynamic measurements. Eligibility was assessed by at least two independent observers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Information on patients, interventions, and outcomes was extracted by at least two independent reviewers using a standard form. The main outcome measure for comparing the effectiveness of Serenoa repens with placebo or other interventions was the change in urologic symptom-scale scores. Secondary outcomes included changes in nocturia and urodynamic measures. The main outcome measure for side effects or adverse events was the number of men reporting side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update 9 new trials involving 2053 additional men (a 64.8% increase) have been included. For the main comparison - Serenoa repens versus placebo - 3 trials were added with 419 subjects and 3 endpoints (IPSS, peak urine flow, prostate size). Overall, 5222 subjects from 30 randomized trials lasting from 4 to 60 weeks were assessed. Twenty-six trials were double blinded and treatment allocation concealment was adequate in eighteen studies.Serenoa repens was not superior to placebo in improving IPSS urinary symptom scores, (WMD (weighted mean difference) -0.77 points, 95% CI -2.88 to 1.34, P > 0.05; 2 trials), finasteride (MD (mean difference) 0.40 points, 95% CI -0.57 to 1.37, P > 0.05; 1 trial), or tamsulosin (WMD -0.52 points, 95% CI -1.91 to 0.88, P > 0.05; 2 trials).For nocturia, Serenoa repens was significantly better than placebo (WMD -0.78 nocturnal visits, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.22, P < 0.05; 9 trials), but with the caveat of significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 66%). A sensitivity analysis, utilizing higher quality, larger trials (>/= 40 subjects), demonstrated no significant difference (WMD -0.31 nocturnal visits, 95% CI -0.70 to 0.08, P > 0.05; 5 trials) (I(2) = 11%). Serenoa repens was not superior to finasteride (MD -0.05 nocturnal visits, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.39, P > 0.05; 1 trial), or to tamsulosin (per cent improvement) (RR) (risk ratio) 0.91, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.27, P > 0.05; 1 trial).Comparing peak urine flow, Serenoa repens was not superior to placebo at trial endpoint (WMD 1.02 mL/s, 95% CI -0.14 to 2.19, P > 0.05; 10 trials), or by comparing mean change (WMD 0.31 mL/s, 95% CI -0.56 to 1.17, P > 0.05; 2 trials).Comparing prostate size at endpoint, there was no significant difference between Serenoa repens and placebo (MD -1.05 cc, 95% CI -8.84 to 6.75, P > 0.05; 2 trials), or by comparing mean change (MD -1.22 cc, 95% CI -3.91 to 1.47, P > 0.05; 1 trial).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serenoa repens was not more effective than placebo for treatment of urinary symptoms consistent with BPH.