The Efficacy of Terazosin in the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CPPS): Comparison between Category IIIa and IIIb

Yon Hwan Jung; Jong Gu Kim; In Rae Cho

doi:10.4111/kju.2006.47.11.1191

Journal List > Korean J Urol > v.47(11) > 1069788

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Jung, Kim, and Cho: The Efficacy of Terazosin in the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CPPS): Comparison between Category IIIa and IIIb

Original Article

Korean Journal of Urology

Korean Journal of Urology 2006; 47(11): 1191-1196.

Published online: 30 November 2006

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2006.47.11.1191

The Efficacy of Terazosin in the Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CPPS): Comparison between Category IIIa and IIIb

Yon Hwan Jung, Jong Gu Kim, In Rae Cho

Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Inje University, Busan, Korea.

Corresponding author (ircho@ilsanpaik.ac.kr)

Received 5 June 2006 Accepted 18 September 2006

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of terazosin in chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) and compare the effect of terazosin between CPPS IIIa and IIIb.

Materials and Methods

Between January 2004 and February 2005, CPPS patients, aged 45 or below, with a small size prostate (≤25ml), were enrolled in this study. The study comprised of 127 patients (CPPS category IIIa; 71, CPPS category IIIb; 56), who were randomly placed into one of two groups; the terazosin (T) and non-terazosin (non T) groups. The terazosin group was given 3-4mg/day of terazosin for 12 weeks. In all patients, the urinalysis, expressed prostatic massage (EPS), uroflowmetry, National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) were checked at the initial visit. After 12 weeks, the NIH-CPSI and uroflowmetry were evaluated, and the change in the NIH-CPSI domain scores and maximal flow rate (Qmax) between the two groups evaluated; a sub-analysis was also performed between categories IIIa and IIIb.

Results

The changes in the NIH-CPSI domains (pain, voiding symptom, quality of life, total) and Qmax of the T group were more significantly improved than those in the non T group (p<0.05). For category IIIa (n=71), the T group (n=42) showed significant improvements in all NIH-CPSI domains and the Qmax (p<0.05); whereas, the non-T group (n=29) only showed significant improvement in the pain and total scores in the NIH-CPSI domains (p<0.05). However, in a comparison between both category IIIa groups, there were no significant difference in the changes in the NIH-CPSI domains, with the exception of the Qmax (p>0.05). In category IIIb (n=56), the T group (n=29) showed significant improvements in all NIH-CPSI domains and the Qmax (p<0.05), but the non-T group (n=27) showed no significant improvement in the NIH-CPSI domains or the Qmax (p>0.05). Comparing both category IIIb groups, the T group showed a greater improvement in the pain score in the NIH-CPSI domains and the Qmax than the non-T group.

Conclusions

Terazosin was effective in all domains of the symptom score and in the Qmax for CPPS.

Keywords: Prostatitis, Pelvic pain, Syndrome, Terazosin

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Baseline National Institute of Health-chronic Prostate Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) values and maximal flow rates (Qmax) in the patients from both groups

QoL: quality of life

Table 2

Comparison of the effects of terazosin in chronic pelvic pain syndrome (category III) patients between the baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment

^*: p<0.05 between baseline and after-treatment, ^†: p<0.05 between terazosin and non-terazosin group, NIH-CPSI: National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, QoL: quality of life, Qmax: maximal flow rate

Table 3

Comparison of the effects of terazosin in inflammatory chronic pelvic pain syndrome (category IIIa) patients between the baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment

Table 4

Comparison of the effects of terazosin in non-inflammatory chronic pelvic pain syndrome (category IIIb) patients between the baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment

^*: p<0.05 between baseline and after-treatment score, ^†: p<0.05 between terazosin and non-terazosin group, NIH-CPSI: National Institute of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, QoL: quality of life, Qmax: maximal flow rate

References

1. Nickel JC. Prostatitis: myths and realities. Urology. 1998. 51:362–366.

2. Cho IR. Evaluation and treatment of patients with prostatitis. Korean J Androl. 2005. 20:1–11.

3. Cho IR, Park SC, Park SS. The prevalence of the symptoms of the prostate syndrome patients under 50. Korean J Urol. 1998. 39:751–756.

4. Wenninger K, Heiman JR, Rothman I, Berghuis JP, Berger RE. Sickness impact of chronic nonbacterial prostatitis and its correlates. J Urol. 1996. 155:965–968.

5. Krieger JN, Nyberg L Jr, Nickel JC. NIH consensus definition and classification of prostatitis. JAMA. 1999. 282:236–237.

6. Schaeffer AJ, Datta NS, Fowler JE Jr, Krieger JN, Litwin MS, Nadler RB, et al. Overview summary statement. Diagnosis and management of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). Urology. 2002. 60:Suppl 6. 1–4.

7. Donker PJ, Ivanovici F, Noach EL. Analyses of the urethral pressure profile by means of electromyography and the administration of drugs. Br J Urol. 1972. 44:180–193.

8. Mehik A, Hellstrom P, Lukkarinen O, Sarpola A, Alfthan O. Increased intraprostatic pressure in patients with chronic prostatitis. Urol Res. 1999. 27:277–279.

9. Mehik A, Helstrom P, Nickel JC, Kilponen A, Leskinen M, Sarpola A, et al. The chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome can be characterized by prostatic tissue pressure measurements. J Urol. 2002. 167:137–140.

10. Meares EM, Stamey TA. Bacteriologic localization patterns in bacterial prostatitis and urethritis. Invest Urol. 1968. 5:492–518.

11. Nickel JC, Pontari M, Moon T, Gittleman M, Malek G, Farrington J, et al. A randomized placebo controlled, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of rofecoxib in the treatment of chronic nonbacterial prostatitis. J Urol. 2003. 169:1401–1405.

12. Datta NS. Role of alpha-blockers in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Urology. 2002. 69:Suppl 6. 27–28.

13. Barbalias GA, Nikiforidis G, Liatsikos EN. Alpha-blockers for the treatment of chronic prostatitis in combination with antibiotics. J Urol. 1998. 159:883–887.

14. Barbalias GA. Why alpha-blockers in prostatitis? Eur Urol. 2003. 60:27–29.

15. de la Rosette JJ, Karthaus HF, van Kerrebroeck PE, de Boo T, Debruyne FM. Research in 'prostatitis syndrome': the use of alfuzocin (a new alpha 1-receptor-blocking agents) in patients mainly presenting with micturition complaints of an irritative nature and confirmed urodynamic abnormalities. Eur Urol. 1992. 22:222–227.

16. Mehik A, Alas P, Nickel JC, Sarpola A, Helstrom PJ. Alfuzosin treatment for chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot study. Urology. 2003. 62:425–429.

17. Kim SJ, Ha JS, Lee SJ, Cho YH, Yoon MS. Clinical effect of tamsulosin in noninflammatory chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Korean J Urol. 2003. 44:120–123.

18. Nickel JC, Narayan P, McKay J, Doyle C. Treatment of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome with tamsulosin: a randomized double blind trial. J Urol. 2004. 171:1594–1597.

19. Alexander RB, Propert KJ, Schaeffer AJ, Landis JR, Nickel JC, O'leary MP, et al. Ciprofloxacin or tamsulosin in men with chronic prostatitis-chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 2004. 141:581–589.

20. Neal DE Jr, Moon TD. Use of terazocin in prostatodynia and validation of a symptom score questionnaire. Urology. 1994. 43:460–465.

21. Gul O, Eroglu M, Ozok U. Use of terazosin in patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome and evaluation by prostatitis symptom score index. Int Urol Nephrol. 2001. 32:433–436.

22. Cheah PY, Liong ML, Yuen KH, Teh CL, Khor T, Yang JR, et al. Terazosin therapy for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a randomized, placebo controlled trial. J Urol. 2003. 169:592–596.

TOOLS

Similar articles