Naftopidil for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms compatible with benign prostatic hyperplasia

被引:10
|
作者
Hwang, Eu Chang [1 ]
Gandhi, Shreyas [2 ]
Jung, Jae Hung [3 ,4 ]
Imamura, Mari [5 ]
Kim, Myung Ha [6 ]
Pang, Ran [7 ]
Dahm, Philipp [8 ]
机构
[1] Chonnam Natl Univ, Hwasun Hosp, Med Sch, Dept Urol, Hwasun, South Korea
[2] McMaster Univ, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[3] Yonsei Univ, Wonju Coll Med, Dept Urol, Wonju, South Korea
[4] Yonsei Univ, Wonju Coll Med, Inst Evidence Based Med, Wonju, South Korea
[5] Univ Aberdeen, Acad Urol, Aberdeen, Scotland
[6] Yonsei Univ, Wonju Coll Med, Yonsei Wonju Med Lib, Wonju, South Korea
[7] China Acad Chinese Med Sci, Guang Men Hosp, Dept Urol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[8] Minneapolis VA Hlth Care Syst, Urol Sect, Minneapolis, MN USA
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2018年 / 10期
关键词
Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists [adverse effects; therapeutic use; Naphthalenes [adverse effects; Piperazines [adverse effects; Prostatic Hyperplasia [complications; Prostatism [drug therapy; etiology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonamides [adverse effects; TAMSULOSIN HYDROCHLORIDE; OVERACTIVE BLADDER; ALPHA(1)-ADRENOCEPTOR ANTAGONISTS; CLINICAL PROGRESSION; ALPHA-1; BLOCKERS; STORAGE SYMPTOM; SEXUAL FUNCTION; HEALTH-STATUS; 75; MG; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD007360.pub3
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition in ageing men that may cause lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Treatment aims are to relieve symptoms and prevent disease-related complications. Naftopidil is an alpha-blocker (AB) that has a high affinity for the Ald receptor that may have advantages in treating LUTS in this setting. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009. Since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant. Objectives To evaluate the effects of naftopidil for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH. Search methods We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, LILAC, and Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status up to 31 May 2018 Selection criteria We included all parallel RCTs. We also included cross -over design trials. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently classified and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses using a random -effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Primary outcomes were urological symptom scores, quality of life (QoL) and treatment withdrawals for any reason; secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawals due to adverse events, acute urinary retention, surgical intervention for BPH, and cardiovascular and sexual adverse events. We considered outcomes measured up to 12 months after randomisation as short term, and later than 12 months as long term. We rated the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. Main results We included 22 RCTs with 2223 randomised participants across four comparisons for short-term follow-up. This abstract focuses on only two of four comparisons for which we found data since two comparators (i.e. propiverine and Eviprostat (phytotherapy)) are rarely used. One study comparing naftopidil to placebo did not report any relevant outcomes and was therefore excluded. There were no trials that compared to combination therapy with naftopidil or any 5 -alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) to combination therapy with other ABs and any 5-ARIs. All included studies were conducted in Asian countries. Study duration ranged from four to 12 weeks. Mean age was 67.8 years, prostate volume was 35.4 mL, and International Prostate Symptom Score was 18.3. We were unable to perform any of the preplanned subgroup analyses based on age and baseline symptom score. Naftopidil versus tamsulosin Based on 12 studies with 965 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in urological symptom score (mean difference (MD) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.09 to 1.04 measured on a scale from 0 to 35 with higher score representing increased symptoms), QoL (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.30; measured on a scale from 0 to 6 with higher scores representing worse QoL), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; corresponding to 7 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 32 fewer to 31 more). Naftopidil may have resulted in little to no difference in sexual adverse events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.22); this would result in 26 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants (95% CI 43 fewer to 13 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for urological symptom score and low for the other outcomes. Naftopidil versus silodosin Based on five studies with 652 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in the urological symptom scores (MD 1.04, 95% CI -0.78 to 2.85), QoL (MD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.66), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.23; corresponding to 26 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 62 fewer to 32 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as low for all these outcomes. Naftopidil likely reduced sexual adverse events (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; corresponding to 126 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants, 95% CI 139 fewer to 86 fewer). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for sexual adverse events. Authors' conclusions Naftopidil appears to have similar effects in the urological symptom scores and QoL compared to tamsulosin and silodosin. Naftopidil has similar sexual adverse events compared to tamsulosin but has fewer compared to silodosin.
引用
收藏
页数:139
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Naftopidil for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms compatible with benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Garimella, Pranav S.
    Fink, Howard A.
    MacDonald, Roderick
    Wilt, Timothy J.
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2009, (04):
  • [2] A Review of Naftopidil for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Suggestive of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
    Fukuta F.
    Masumori N.
    Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports, 2015, 10 (2) : 160 - 169
  • [3] Comparative evaluation of naftopidil and tamsulosin in the treatment of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms with benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Griwan, Mahavir Singh
    Karthikeyan, Y. R.
    Kumar, Mandeep
    Singh, Bikram Jit
    Singh, Santosh Kumar
    UROLOGY ANNALS, 2014, 6 (03) : 181 - 186
  • [4] Naftopidil for the treatment of urinary symptoms in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Masumori, Naoya
    THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL RISK MANAGEMENT, 2011, 7 : 227 - 238
  • [5] Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
    Sarma, Aruna V.
    Wei, John T.
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2012, 367 (03): : 248 - 257
  • [6] Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Foreword
    Taneja, Samir S.
    UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2016, 43 (03) : XIII - XIV
  • [7] Influence of Naftopidil on Plasma Monoamine Levels and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
    Kadekawa, Katsumi
    Sugaya, Kimio
    Mukoyama, Hideki
    Sakumoto, Misao
    Shimabukuro, Hiroichi
    Shimabukuro, Syuichi
    Matayoshi, Yukihide
    Onaga, Tomohiro
    Ashitomi, Katsuhiro
    Nishijima, Saori
    LUTS-LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS, 2016, 8 (02) : 100 - 105
  • [8] Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, and Urinary Retention
    Alawamlh, Omar Al Hussein
    Goueli, Ramy
    Lee, Richard K.
    MEDICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2018, 102 (02) : 301 - +
  • [9] Comparison of Naftopidil 75 mg with Tamsulosin Hydrochloride 0.2 mg in the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
    Shigemura, Katsumi
    Yamamichi, Fukashi
    Matsumoto, Minori
    Tanaka, Kazushi
    Yamashita, Masuo
    Arakawa, Soichi
    Fujisawa, Masato
    LUTS-LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS, 2012, 4 (03) : 136 - 139
  • [10] Botulinum A toxin for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms
    Thomas C.A.
    Chuang Y.-C.
    Giannantoni A.
    Chancellor M.B.
    Current Urology Reports, 2006, 7 (4) : 266 - 271