Evidence Hub

The role of nutraceutical medications in men with non bacterial chronic prostatitis and chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A prospective non blinded study utilizing flower pollen extracts versus bioflavonoids

Maurizi A, De Luca F, Zanghi A, Manzi E, Leonardo C, Guidotti M, Antonaccio FP, Olivieri V et al.

Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia : organo ufficiale [di] Societa italiana di ecografia urologica e nefrologica, 2019

68 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Chronic prostatitis (CP)/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) represents a challenge for the urologist, since the therapeutic efficacy does not always result in a satisfactory quality of life for the patients. Often the side effects of the medications used (antiinflammatories, antibiotics, alpha blockers) far outweighs the benefits gained with their admission. The choice of nutraceutical medications is preferred for their effectiveness, that has been accepted and proven by the scientific community, and for the low incidence of side effects. The objective of this study to compare the therapeutic efficacy of the flower pollen extracts (Deprox®) versus Bioflavonoids in terms of reduction of symptoms, and in the average waiting time of the variation of the National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), and to evaluate the quality of life improvement of the patients affected by CP/CPPS.

Methods: Among the 68 patients presented with prostatic symptoms to the Hospital "Umberto I" in Rome, Italy between March 2016 and June 2016, 54 patients met the clinical diagnosis of CP/CPPS (class IIIa or IIIb according to the NIH classification). The patients were assigned to either treatment with Deprox® or quercetin based on a randomization scheme previously determined.The NIH- CPSI, IPSS, QoL questionnaires were administered. Every patient underwent bacterial cultures and trans-rectal ultrasound.

Results: There was a statistically significant…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 68 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