The efficacy of antibiotic and alpha-blocker combination therapy versus antibiotic monotherapy in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to explore the efficacy of a combination of alpha-blockers and antibiotics compared with antibiotic monotherapy in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane/CENTRAL, EBSCOHost/CINAHL, ProQuest, and Scopus on January 2020. Randomized controlled trials comparing antibiotic monotherapy with combination therapy of antibiotics and alpha-blockers in CP/CPPS patients lasting at least 4 weeks were included. The study eligibility assessment, data extraction, and study quality assessment were carried out by each author independently and in duplication. RESULTS: A total of six low- to high-quality studies with 396 patients were included in the study. Two reviews reported lower National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) total scores in the monotherapy arm at Week 6. Only one study reported otherwise. On Day 90, the NIH-CPSI score was found to be lower in the combination group. In the pain, urinary, and quality-of-life domain, most studies agree that combination therapy is not superior to monotherapy. However, on Day 90, all domains were found to be lower in the combination therapy. Responder rates were found to vary between studies. Only four out of six studies reported a response rate. Responder rates were lower in the combination group at 6 weeks of observation. On Day 90, responder rates were found to be better in the combination group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination therapy of antibiotics and alpha-blockers is not substantially better than antibiotic monotherapy in the first 6 weeks of treatment for CP/CPPS patients. This might not be applicable to a longer duration of treatment.

The Role of 3D-Printed Phantoms and Devices for Organ-specified Appliances in Urology.

Urology is one of the fields that are always at the frontline of bringing scientific advancements into clinical practice, including 3D printing (3DP). This study aims to discuss and presents the current role of 3D-printed phantoms and devices for organ-specified applications in urology. The discussion started with a literature search regarding the two mentioned topics within PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and EBSCOhost databases. 3D-printed urological organ phantoms are reported for providing residents new insight regarding anatomical characteristics of organs, either normal or diseased, in a tangible manner. Furthermore, 3D-printed organ phantoms also helped urologists to prepare a pre-surgical planning strategy with detailed anatomical models of the diseased organs. In some centers, 3DP technology also contributed to developing specified devices for disease management. To date, urologists have been benefitted by 3D-printed phantoms and devices in the education and disease management of organs of in the genitourinary system, including kidney, bladder, prostate, ureter, urethra, penis, and adrenal. It is safe to say that 3DP technology can bring remarkable changes to daily urological practices.