Dataset Information

Newer Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities to Treat Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Several newer device-based procedures have recently become available for treating men with lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia, but their effectiveness remains uncertain.

Objective

To assess the longer-term comparative effectiveness (defined as >12 mo of follow-up) of the newer treatment modalities prostatic urethral lift (PUL), transurethral prostate convective radiofrequency water vapor (Rezūm), Aquablation, and prostatic arterial embolization (PAE).

Evidence acquisition

Ovid Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality databases were searched through September 30, 2019; hand searches of references of relevant studies were also performed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English language. We excluded observational studies.

Evidence synthesis

One RCT (n = 91) found that patients undergoing PUL may be less likely to respond (risk ratio [RR] 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-1.0; low certainty of evidence [CoE]) and have a higher mean International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS; mean difference 6.1; 95% CI 2.2-10.0; low CoE) than those undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Among patients undergoing PAE, one small RCT (n = 30) reported similar IPSS response rates (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.7-1.1; low CoE) and one trial (n = 107) found similar mean IPSS (-0.7; 95% CI -1.3 to 2.7; moderate CoE) scores to those among patients undergoing TURP. A single study on Aquablation reported 12 mo of follow-up only, and a single 3-mo trial compared Rezūm with sham treatment.

Conclusions

The current best evidence underlying these newer therapies is limited to few trials (PUL and PAE), short-term follow-up of 12 mo (Aquablation and Rezūm), or sham comparison only (Rezūm).

Patient summary

Evidence for four of the newer surgical treatments for men with an enlarged prostate is limited to few small trials with short-term follow-up; only one trial compared a new treatment modality with sham surgery.

SUBMITTER: Dahm P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8317814 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:CONTEXT:Alpha-blockers (ABs) and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors have an established role in treating male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Recently, newer drugs have shown promise for this indication. OBJECTIVE:To assess the comparative effectiveness and adverse effects (AEs) of newer drugs to treat LUTS attributed to BPH through a systematic review and meta-analysis. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ovid Embase bibliographic databases (through June 2016) were hand searches for references of relevant studies. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials published in English of newer ABs, antimuscarinics, a beta-3 adrenoceptor agonist, phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors, or combination therapy with one of these medications as an active comparator. Observational studies of the same agents with a duration ?1 yr that reported AEs were also included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:We synthesized evidence from 43 randomized controlled trials as well as five observational studies. Based on improvement of mean International Prostate Symptom Score and quality of life scores, the effectiveness of the newer ABs was not different from the older ABs (moderate strength of evidence [SOE]), but had more AEs (low SOE). Antimuscarinics/AB combination therapy had similar outcomes as AB monotherapy (all moderate SOE), but often had more AEs. Phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors alone or in combination with ABs had similar or inferior outcomes than ABs alone. Evidence was insufficient for the beta-3 adrenoceptor agonist. For all newer agents, the evidence was generally insufficient to assess long-term efficacy, prevention of symptom progression, or AEs. CONCLUSIONS:None of the drugs or drug combinations newly used to treat LUTS attributed to BPH showed outcomes superior to traditional AB treatment. Given the lack of superior outcomes, the studies' short time-horizon, and less assurance of their safety, their current value in treating LUTS attributable to BPH appears low. PATIENT SUMMARY:In this paper, we reviewed the evidence of newer drugs to treat men with urinary problems attributable to an enlarged prostate. We found none of the new drugs to be better but there was more concern about side effects.

Project description:This study aimed to investigate perceived ejaculatory function/satisfaction before treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and to identify associations between specific categories of ejaculatory dysfunctions (EjDs) and LUTS. A total of 1574 treatment-naïve men with LUTS/BPH were included in this study. All patients underwent routine evaluation for LUTS/BPH including the International Index of Erectile Function and a 5-item questionnaire developed to assess ejaculatory volume/force/pain/satisfaction/latency time. Patients who had sexual intercourse over the past 4 weeks were classified as sexually active group. A total of 783 patients were categorized as sexually active group. Decreased ejaculatory volume and force were reported by 53.4% and 55.7% of 783 sexually active men, respectively. There was a strong correlation between ejaculatory volume and force. Ejaculatory pain/discomfort, premature ejaculation (PE), and delayed ejaculation (DE) were reported in 41.0%, 16.3%, and 41.4% of the patients, respectively. Over 40.0% of men without decreased ejaculation volume/force were satisfied with ejaculatory function, whereas approximately 6.0% of men with decreased volume/force were satisfied with ejaculatory function. About 30.0% of men with decreased volume/force had orgasmic dysfunction, while approximately 10.0% of men without decreased volume/force did. Decreased ejaculatory volume or force was associated with LUTS severity after adjusting for other influential factors including testosterone level, erectile function, and prostate size on ultrasonography, but PE or DE or ejaculatory pain/discomfort was not. In conclusion, a considerable portion of men with LUTS/BPH appear to have a variety of EjDs. Ejaculatory volume/force and satisfaction/orgasm do not always appear to be concordant. Ejaculatory volume or force is independently associated with LUTS severity, whereas PE or DE or ejaculatory pain/discomfort is not.