Search

The article presents a clinical trial which determines whether pregabalin therapy reduces symptoms in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). Men who were recruited from ten tertiary clinical centers aged at least 18 years with reported symptoms of discomfort or pain in the pelvic region were eligible to participate in the study. The article mentions that the six weeks of treatment with an increasing dosage of pregabalin did not show any clinically significant decrease in CP/CPPS condition as compared with placebo therapy.

Purpose: We determined the feasibility of conducting a randomized clinical trial designed to compare 2 methods of manual therapy (myofascial physical therapy and global therapeutic massage) in patients with urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes. Materials and Methods: We recruited 48 subjects with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome or interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome at 6 clinical centers. Eligible patients were randomized to myofascial physical therapy or global therapeutic massage and were scheduled to receive up to 10 weekly treatments of 1 hour each. Criteria to assess feasibility included adherence of therapists to prescribed therapeutic protocol as determined by records of treatment, adverse events during study treatment and rate of response to therapy as assessed by the patient global response assessment. Primary outcome analysis compared response rates between treatment arms using Mantel-Haenszel methods. Results: There were 23 (49%) men and 24 (51%) women randomized during a 6-month period. Of the patients 24 (51%) were randomized to global therapeutic massage, 23 (49%) to myofascial physical therapy and 44 (94%) completed the study. Therapist adherence to the treatment protocols was excellent. The global response assessment response rate of 57% in the myofascial physical therapy group was significantly higher than the rate of 21% in the global therapeutic massage treatment group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: We judged the feasibility of conducting a full-scale trial of physical therapy methods and the preliminary findings of a beneficial effect of myofascial physical therapy warrants further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In men with chronic prostatitis–chronic pelvic pain syndrome, treatment with alpha-adrenergic receptor blockers early in the course of the disorder has been reported to be effective in some, but not all, relatively small randomized trials. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of alfuzosin, an alpha-adrenergic receptor blocker, in reducing symptoms in men with chronic prostatitis–chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Participation in the study required diagnosis of the condition within the preceding 2 years and no previous treatment with an alpha-adrenergic receptor blocker. Men were randomly assigned to treatment for 12 weeks with either 10 mg of alfuzosin per day or placebo. The primary outcome was a reduction of at least 4 points (from baseline to 12 weeks) in the score on the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) (range, 0 to 43; higher scores indicate more severe symptoms). A 4-point decrease is the minimal clinically significant difference in the score. Results: A total of 272 eligible participants underwent randomization, and in both study groups, 49.3% of participants had a decrease of at least 4 points in their total NIH-CPSI score (rate difference associated with alfuzosin, 0.1%; 95% confidence interval, −11.2 to 11.0; P=0.99). In addition, a global response assessment showed similar response rates at 12 weeks: 33.6% in the placebo group and 34.8% in the alfuzosin group (P=0.90). The rates of adverse events in the two groups were also similar. Conclusions: Our findings do not support the use of alfuzosin to reduce the symptoms of chronic prostatitis–chronic pelvic pain syndrome in men who have not received prior treatment with an alpha-blocker. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00103402.) N Engl J Med 2008;359:2663-73. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]