Evidence Hub

Predicting surgical efficacy and diagnosing histological inflammation: the clinical significance of prostate exosome proteins in benign prostatic hyperplasia

Zhihai Teng, Chenggen Jin, Song Wang, Zhenwei Han, Yanping Zhang, Yaxuan Wang

Translational Andrology and Urology, 2023

69 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common causes of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) among the aging male population. Recent studies have shown that histological inflammation (HI) plays a significant role in BPH, with prostatic exosomal protein (PSEP) identified as a potential biomarker for prostate diseases. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the effect of HI on LUTS in patients with BPH, and to further explore the clinical value of PSEP as a diagnostic biomarker of BPH complicated with HI and whether PSEP could be used as an index to predict the improvement of LUTS after operation. Methods This study was an open-label, cohort study. The study enrolled all patients who were clinical diagnosed as BPH with LUTS and prepared to receive operation of the prostate at the Department of Urology of the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were used to evaluate the LUTS of the BPH. And the enrolled patients were divided into four groups, including none, mild HI, moderate HI, and severe HI, based on postoperative pathological results. Then the relationships between HI and IPSS, the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), as well as PSEP were analyzed. Simple and multiple linear regression analyses were performed on the preoperative IPSS and the difference of IPSS before and after surgery was examined. SPSS software version 26 was used for statistical analysis…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 69 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free