Comparison of 25 and 75 mg/day naftopidil for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective, randomized controlled study. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study of Naftopidil for Treatment of Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: 75 mg Once Daily in the Evening Compared to 25 mg Thrice Daily Naftopidil for the treatment of urinary symptoms in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia Clinical effect of naftopidil on the quality of life of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective study. Crossover comparison study on the therapeutic effects of tamsulosin hydrochloride and naftopidil in lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Single-blind, randomized controlled study of the clinical and urodynamic effects of an alpha-blocker (naftopidil) and phytotherapy (eviprostat) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ejaculatory Disorders Caused by Alpha-1 Blockers for Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Suggestive of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Comparison of Naftopidil and Tamsulosin in a Randomized Multicenter Study Eliciting preferences for drug treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinical effect of alpha 1D/A adrenoceptor inhibitor naftopidil on benign prostatic hyperplasia: an international prostate symptom score and King's Health Questionnaire assessment. α1D/A-adrenoceptor antagonist naftopidil for the male lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: efficacy of dose increase therapy. [A Crossover Comparison Study on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms with Overactive Bladder Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Naftopidil versus Tamsulosin with Solifenacin]. Short-term efficacy and long-term compliance/treatment failure of the alpha1 blocker naftopidil for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia. [Comparison of naftopidil and silodosin in the treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a randomized, crossover study]. [The clinical efficacy of Naftopidil tablet in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia]. A comparison of the efficacy of naftopidil and tamsulosin hydrochloride in medical treatment of benign prostatic enlargement Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Combined Treatment with Fesoterodine Fumarate Extended-Release and Tamsulosin - A Prospective Study Silodosin versus naftopidil for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a multicenter randomized trial.
BACKGROUND The present study investigated the efficacy , safety , and utility of starting an alpha(1d)-selective antagonist , naftopidil , at 75 or 25 mg/day in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . METHODS In this prospect i ve comparative study , the subjects comprised 153 patients with LUTS associated with BPH . Patients were r and omized to receive either 25 mg/day ( Group LD ) or 75 mg/day ( Group HD ) of naftopidil for 4 weeks . The lower urinary tract disease symptom score ( LUTDSS ) , the International Prostate Symptom Score ( IPSS ) , the Quality of life assessment index , the maximum flow rate ( Q(max ) ) , and the residual urine volume were compared between the groups . RESULTS In both groups , the LUTDSS and the IPSS were significantly improved at the endpoint and no significant intergroup differences were identified . However , the improvement in the Q(max ) was significantly better for Group HD than for Group LD . The overall efficacy did not differ significantly between the groups . The degree of improvement in voiding symptoms and LUTDSS among patients with moderate symptoms was significantly greater for Group HD than for Group LD . The frequency of adverse reactions did not differ significantly between the groups . CONCLUSIONS Starting administration at 75 mg/day rather than 25mg/day is helpful for LUTS associated with BPH for patients with moderate symptoms , particularly in improving voiding symptoms . The 75 mg/day administration was considered to be a recommendable therapeutic dose in some patients Introduction : We examined the tolerability of dosage methods of naftopidil in the treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH/male LUTS ) . Patients and Methods : A total of 80 patients with BPH/male LUTS who had an International Prostate Symptom Score ( IPSS ) ≧8 and IPSS quality of life ( QoL ) ≧2 were enrolled and r and omly administered naftopidil for 8 weeks at either 75 mg once daily ( OD ) in the evening ( group O ; n = 41 ) or 25 mg thrice daily ( TID ) in the morning , afternoon and evening ( group T ; n = 39 ) . Results : IPSS total score , IPSS-QoL and BPH impact index ( BII ) were significantly improved for both groups at 8 weeks after starting treatment compared to baseline . IPSS total score and daytime and 24-hour voiding frequencies were significantly improved at 8 weeks after starting treatment for group O in comparison to group T. Group O showed a significantly better degree of change in BII in comparison to group T. Conclusions : Naftopidil 75 mg OD in the evening was better tolerated than naftopidil 25 mg TID for the objective parameter and BII Naftopidil , approved only in Japan , is an α1-adrenergic receptor antagonist ( α1-blocker ) used to treat lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Different from tamsulosin hydrochloride and silodosin , in that it has higher and extremely higher affinity respectively , for the α1A-adrenergic receptor subtype than for the α1D type , naftopidil has distinct characteristics because it has a three times greater affinity for the α1D-adrenergic receptor subtype than for the α1A subtype . Although well- design ed large-scale r and omized controlled studies are lacking and the optimal dosage of naftopidil is not always completely determined , previous reports from Japan have shown that naftopidil has superior efficacy to a placebo and comparable efficacy to other α1-blockers such as tamsulosin . On the other h and , the incidences of ejaculatory disorders and intraoperative floppy iris syndrome induced by naftopidil may be lower than for tamsulosin and silodosin having high affinity for the α1A-adrenergic receptor subtype . However , it remains unknown if the efficacy and safety of naftopidil in Japanese is applicable to white , black and Hispanic men having LUTS/BPH in western countries OBJECTIVES To investigate the benefit of alpha1-adrenoceptor antagonist naftopidil on the quality of life ( QOL ) of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH/LUTS ) . METHODS A total of 99 men with BPH/LUTS were prospect ively recruited . The Short Form-8 ( SF-8 ) was used for generic QOL assessment and each parameter was compared with the norm in these patients . Longitudinal changes were evaluated using the SF-8 and the International Prostatic Symptoms Score ( I-PSS ) at baseline , 4 and 8 weeks after naftopidil administration . The relationship between SF-8 and I-PSS was analyzed . RESULTS Five of eight components in the SF-8 were significantly lower than the Japanese national norm at baseline . SF-8 score was improved by naftopidil at 4 and 8 weeks in general health ( GH ) and physical component summary ( PCS ) in the patients in their 70s . Mental health ( MH ) and mental component summary ( MCS ) were improved at 8 weeks in patients in their 60s . When analyzing the whole cohort , SF-8 GH , role emotional ( RE ) and MH had improved at 8 weeks , which was similar to the norm , and bodily pain ( BP ) results were better . Compared with the baseline , total I-PSS , storage/voiding symptoms and QOL index scores improved significantly under naftopidil . Each component of I-PSS ( except for hesitancy ) correlated with SF-8 sub-scales ( except for BP ) to some extent . CONCLUSIONS BPH/LUTS impairs generic QOL , which is improved by naftopidil treatment . SF-8 can be a useful instrument to assess the efficacy of BPH/LUTS treatment because its simplicity to complete and analyze , and its meaningful relationship to I-PSS There is no consensus on the evaluated efficacy of individual alpha(1)-blockers in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . This study compared the clinical benefits of tamsulosin hydrochloride with those of naftopidil in BPH . Men aged 54 - 84 years with a main complaint of BPH were r and omly assigned to receive consecutive treatment with tamsulosin then naftopidil ( T-N group , 25 patients ) , or naftopidil then tamsulosin hydrochloride ( N-T group , 20 patients ) . The therapeutic effects were compared in a crossover design . Administration was continued for 28 days in each treatment period . Both groups showed similar improvements during the first treatment period . However , during the second treatment period after crossover , therapeutic effects were greater in the N-T group . Tamsulosin was more effective than naftopidil on intermittency , nocturia and quality of life scores .  Tamsulosin and naftopidil have different efficacy profiles for LUTS associated with BPH AIM The aim of our study was to examine the efficacy of naftopidil in terms of the international prostate symptom score ( IPSS ) and urodynamic parameters in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Eviprostat was used as a control to study the efficacy of naftopidil . METHODS Forty-nine patients with BPH ( mean age 67.9 + /- 7.8 years ) were involved in the study . Patients were r and omly assigned either to the naftopidil group , which was treated with the alpha-blocker naftopidil ( 50 - 75 mg daily , 36 patients ) , or the eviprostat group , which was treated with phytotherapy ( six tablets of eviprostat daily , 13 patients ) . RESULTS The mean total IPSS , the total storage and voiding symptom scores , and the quality of life score decreased significantly ( P < 0.0001 for each variable ) in the naftopidil group , but not in the eviprostat group . In the naftopidil group , analyses showed significant increases in average and maximum flow rate and bladder capacity at first desire to void ( P < 0.001 , P = 0.001 and P = 0.024 , respectively ) , and significant decreases in the postvoid residual , the percent of residual and the Abrams-Griffiths number ( P = 0.009 , P = 0.008 and P = 0.042 , respectively ) . However , in the eviprostat group , no significant changes were noted in terms of these symptomatic and urodynamic parameters . In the pressure/flow study , an improvement in the International Continence Society nomogram grade was noted in 29 % of the naftopidil group , but in only 16 % of the eviprostat group . Among the 14 patients in the naftopidil group , detrusor overactivity disappeared in 21 % and cystometric capacity increased in 36 % , but no improvement in detrusor overactivity was noted in the eviprostat group . CONCLUSIONS Naftopidil appears to have been effective in this short-term treatment of BPH Introduction : To investigate the incidence of ejaculatory disorders caused by naftopidil and tamsulosin in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Material s and Methods : Ninety-five patients with LUTS/BPH who had International Prostate Symptom Scores ( IPSS ) of 8 or more were r and omly assigned to receive naftopidil ( 50 mg/day , n = 48 ) or tamsulosin ( 0.2 mg/day , n = 47 ) . Before and 12 weeks after treatment , a question naire was used to evaluate ejaculation . Results : Among men who had sexual activity during the 12 weeks , the proportion who reported an abnormal feeling on ejaculation was higher in the tamsulosin group ( 16.7 % ) than in the naftopidil group ( 7.4 % ) , although the difference was not significant ( p = 0.402 ) . The proportion of men who reported reduced ejaculatory volume after treatment was significantly higher in the tamsulosin group ( 96.0 % ) than in the naftopidil group ( 73.1 % , p = 0.0496 ) . On the other h and , the improvements in IPSS and the quality of life index were significantly higher in the tamsulosin group than in the naftopidil group . Conclusions : Tamsulosin may cause a higher incidence of ejaculatory disorders than naftopidil , although the efficacy of 0.2 mg tamsulosin may be better than that of 50 mg naftopidil PURPOSE There are 2 main medical preparations available for lower urinary tract symptoms result ing from benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Choosing between an alpha-blocker and a 5alpha-reductase inhibitor requires trade-offs between their attributes or characteristics . We investigated the relative importance of and trade-offs between the attributes of the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor dutasteride and alpha-blockers in community dwelling men using a vali date d technique . MATERIAL S AND METHODS A discrete choice experiment was administered to 211 men older than 40 years who were r and omly selected from the general United Kingdom population . Attributes investigated in the discrete choice experiment were time to symptom improvement , sexual and nonsexual side effects , the risks of acute urinary retention ( AUR ) and surgery , cost and prostate size decrease . Using regression analysis the relative importance of these attributes , the trade-offs that men are willing to make between these attributes and the willingness to pay for each attribute were estimated . RESULTS All attributes were important to respondents . The most important attribute was side effects . The least preferred side effects was impotence , followed by decreased libido and dizziness . Respondents were willing to wait 13 , 2 and 8 months longer for symptom improvement in exchange for decreased prostate size , and the risks of AUR and surgery , respectively . Men reporting moderate symptoms were less concerned about sexual side effects , time to symptom improvement and the risk of AUR compared with men reporting mild symptoms . CONCLUSIONS Given the attribute levels of BPH medical treatment , overall community dwelling men preferred the 5alpha-reductase inhibitor over alpha-blockers . In the interests of shared decision making it is important to consider the importance of eliciting the preferences of patients with BPH OBJECTIVES To examine the effect of alpha 1D/A adrenoceptor inhibitor naftopidil on health-related quality of life ( QOL ) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . METHODS A total of 56 newly diagnosed patients with symptomatic BPH were prospect ively enrolled and treated with 50 mg naftopidil daily for more than 12 weeks . All underwent pre-treatment documentation of lower urinary tract symptoms , QOL assessment using the international prostate symptom score ( IPSS ) and King 's Health Question naire ( KHQ ) , and uroflowmetry . A post-treatment assessment was performed at 12 weeks . RESULTS IPSS scores as well as QOL index showed a significant improvement after naftopidil administration . Similarly , all seven domains except general health perceptions and social limitations in the KHQ question naire were significantly improved . When dividing the patients into overactive bladder ( OAB ) and non-OAB groups , only the OAB group showed significant improvement in almost all the domains of KHQ . Change ratios of the IPSS were not associated with those of KHQ domain scores in the OAB group . On the other h and , in the non-OAB group more domains presented improvements , which were associated with those of IPSS scores . CONCLUSIONS Twelve-week treatment with naftopidil for symptomatic BPH patients is associated with significant improvement in the IPSS , QOL index , maximum urinary flow rate , post-void residual urine volume ( PVR ) and almost all domains in KHQ . KHQ is useful for the evaluation of clinical response in BPH patients , particularly in those with associated OAB OBJECTIVES To examine the efficacy of dose increase therapy in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia who responded poorly to 50 mg/day of naftopidil .  METHODS A total of 95 patients received 50 mg/day of naftopidil for 8 weeks . After this treatment period , they were divided into two groups : the poor responders were defined as those who either had an International Prostate Symptom Score- Quality of Life ≥ 4 or with an International Prostate Symptom Score- Quality of Life of 3 whose International Prostate Symptom Score- Quality of Life improved < 2 points ( group A ) . All other patients were defined as responders to naftopidil 50 mg/day ( group B ) . The dose of naftopidil was increased to 75 mg/day in group A , and maintained at 50 mg/day in group B. The treatment was continued for a further 8 weeks . RESULTS The prostate volume at the baseline was significantly larger in group A than group B. The improvement of International Prostate Symptom Score total score , International Prostate Symptom Score- Quality of Life , and voided volume after 8 weeks was significantly better in group B than in group A. However , there was no significant difference in the changes of all parameters between the two groups after 16 weeks . CONCLUSIONS A dose increase to 75 mg/day is an effective treatment strategy in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia who responded poorly to an initial dose of 50 mg/day of naftopidil . Furthermore , a starting dose of 75 mg/day should be considered in patients with a large prostate volume , as this is a predictive factor for dose increase We compared the efficacy of naftopidil monotherapy with combination therapy using tamsulosin hydrochloride and solifenacin succinate in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) with overactive bladder ( OAB ) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Thirty one patients were enrolled in a r and omized crossover study . Fourteen patients were initially prescribed naftopidil 75 mg ( N ) for 8 weeks , followed by tamsulosin 0.2 mg and solifenacin 5 mg ( TS ) for 8 weeks ( group N ) ; another 17 were initially prescribed TS , followed by N ( group TS ) . The efficacy variables were the changes in international prostate symptom score ( I-PSS ) , quality of life ( QOL ) score , overative bladder symptom score ( OABSS ) , and post-void residual ( PVR ) urine volume . After the study , a question naire survey was carried out about the choice of treatment . After treatment with each agent , total I-PSS , storage symptom score , QOL score and OABSS except for the daytime frequency were significantly improved from baseline . PVR was significantly increased after TS treatment . There were no significant differences between the two treatments except for PVR . As a result of the question naire survey , 13 patients chose N and 17 chose TS . In conclusion , N monotherapy can be expected to have an equal effect in the treatment of LUTS with OAB secondary to BPH in comparison with TS combination therapy OBJECTIVE To evaluate treatment failure during a 4-year follow-up period after administration of naftopidil for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) in real-life clinical practice . MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 247 patients with LUTS/BPH who had an International Prostate Symptom Score ( IPSS ) of > or = 8 were enrolled in the study .  Naftopidil , 50 mg/day , was given to the patients . They were followed for 4 years with periodic evaluation . Treatment failure was defined as conversion to other medical treatment or to surgery . RESULTS Of the 247 patients , treatment failure occurred in 42 ( 17.0 % ) during the 4-year follow-up period . The 4-year treatment failure rate was on the Kaplan-Meier curve 35.0 % . Among parameters assessed at baseline , prostate volume ( PV ) was the only significant determinant of treatment failure : patients with a PV of > or = 35 ml had a 2.1 times higher hazard of treatment failure than those with a PV of < 35 ml ( 95 % CI 1.06 - 4.33 ; p=0.03 ) . Patients with a severe IPSS at 12 weeks after administration of naftopidil had a 3.5 times higher hazard than those having a mild/moderate IPSS ( 95 % CI 1.34 - 9.26 ; p=0.01 ) . After 4 years , 200 patients ( 81 % ) had stopped taking naftopidil because of adverse events , treatment failure , loss to follow-up , etc . CONCLUSIONS There were significant improvements in IPSS and urinary flow rate with naftopidil although it is unknown whether these improvements were significantly larger than the placebo effect as the study was non-r and omized . However , only 19 % of patients were known to have continued with the same medication for 4 years in real-life clinical practice . Patients who have a large prostate at baseline and a severe IPSS at 12 weeks after treatment are more likely to have treatment failure , although a prospect i ve study is needed to confirm this We compared the efficacy , safety , and patient preferences for two α1-adrenoceptor ( AR ) antagonists with different affinity for AR subtypes , naftopidil ( Naf ) and silodosin ( Silo ) , for the treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( male LUTS/BPH ) . New patients diagnosed with male LUTS/BPH were r and omly divided into either the Naf-Silo group or the Silo-Naf group ( Naf : 50 - 75 mg once daily for 2 weeks followed by 75 mg once daily for 4 weeks ; Silo : 2 - 4 mg twice daily for 2 weeks followed by 4 mg twice daily for 4 weeks ) . A survey was conducted to evaluate patient drug preferences after completion of the study and the reasons for the preferences . Naf and Silo  improved the total International Prostate Symptom Score ( IPSS ) compared with baseline . There was no significant difference between Naf and Silo in improvement in the IPSS total score . Adverse effects were more frequent with Silo than with Naf ( P=0 . 002 ) . No significant difference in patient preference for the drugs was observed . These findings indicate that Naf and Silo provide similar clinical efficacy , with no difference in patient preference for the drugs , although adverse effects were significantly more frequent with Silo than with Naf OBJECTIVES To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Naftopidil tablet in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia . METHODS Eighty BPH patients were divided into two groups r and omly by double-blind , double-simulated and active control parallel study trials . Forty patients in treatment group were given Naftopidil tablet 25 mg , p.o . , qn for 42 days , while 40 patients in control group were given Tamsulosin 0.2 mg , p.o . , qn for 42 days . Statistical analysis was given from 77 cases in the groups . Estimation of the efficacy was done by the change of major indexes include international prostate symptom score ( IPSS ) , maximum flowrate ( Qmax ) and secondary indexes such as quality of life ( QOL ) , residual urine ( Ru ) and volume of prostate ( V ) . RESULTS The changes of IPSS , Qmax , QOL had significant difference between two groups before and after treatment(P < 0.05 ) . The change of Ru had no significant difference between two groups before and after treatment ( P > 0.05 ) while there was significant difference between two groups after six-week treatment(P < 0.05 ) . The change of V had no significant difference ( P > 0.05 ) . The adverse reactions in both groups were mild , and there was no significant difference between two groups(P > 0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS Naftopidil tablet was safe and effective in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia Introduction : Lower urinary tract symptoms in men , over age of 50 years is suggestive of benign prostatic enlargement ( BPE ) . Different alpha-blockers have been evaluated for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia for over last 30 years . This study was conducted in a tertiary care institution during the period of year between June 2011 and August 2013 to compare the effect of naftopidil and tamsulosin in reducing the obstructive and irritable symptoms of BPE . Subjects and Methods : A prospect i ve r and omized comparative study was carried on 60 patients of BPE by assigning half of them to treatment with tamsulosin and rest with naftopidil .  Pre- and post-treatment uroflowmetry ( UFM ) , post-void residue ( PVR ) , International Prostate Symptoms Score ( IPSS ) , were obtained at 15 and 30 days after starting treatment . Results : The age of patients ranged from 51 to 78 . At base line there was no statistical difference between UFM parameter , PVR and IPSS in the two groups . UFM and PVR showed significantly better response at both intervals with naftopidil . Comparison of IPSS showed better improvement in Group A both at 15 and 30 days . It was seen that the obstructive symptoms showed a significantly better response with tamsulosin and symptoms of irritability was seen better response with naftopidil . Conclusion : It was seen that during the period of follow-up of 30 days naftopidil had a better effect on UFM , PVR , IPSS compared with tamsulosin . In general , obstructive symptoms showed better improvement in tamsulosin and irritative symptoms showed better improvement in naftopidil Objective : To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fesoterodine extended-release ( ER ) plus tamsulosin in men with lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Patients and Methods : Men aged ≥50 years , with LUTS , prostate volume ≤60 ml and International Prostate Symptom Score ( IPSS ) ≥13 were enrolled in this study . 173 consecutive patients were treated initially with tamsulosin ( 0.4 mg ) for 1 week . At the second visit , 47 patients out of the sample of 173 who were still experiencing inconvenient LUTS were r and omized into two groups . The first group received a therapy with tamsulosin and fesoterodine combination ( group 1 , n = 24 ) while the second continued the therapy with the single administration of tamsulosin ( group 2 , n = 23 ) for an additional 4-week period . Results : There was no statistically significant difference in age , prostate volume , Qmax , and postvoid residual urine between the two groups . A statistical significance appeared in the combination group regarding the storage and the total IPSS values among the second and third visits ( 10.5 ± 1.4 to 8.5 ± 1.3 and 16.1 ± 1.8 to 13.7 ± 1.5 respectively ) . Conclusion : Regarding bothersome LUTS and storage symptoms  , fesoterodine ER and tamsulosin combination was significantly more effective than the single administration of tamsulosin This was a multicenter r and omized trial to investigate the clinical efficacy and the impact on sexual function of alpha-1A selective silodosin and alpha-1D selective naftopidil for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia . A total of 97 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia who had an International Prostate Symptom Score of 8 or more were r and omly assigned to receive silodosin ( 8 mg/day , n = 53 ) or naftopidil ( 75 mg/day , n = 44 ) . Before and 4 , 8 and 12 weeks after treatment , International Prostate Symptom Score and its quality of life score were used to assess lower urinary tract symptoms . Also , International Index of Erectile Function-5 , and an original question naire were used to evaluate erectile function and ejaculation for sexually active patients , respectively . The silodosin group showed advantages in terms of voiding symptoms and quality of life of International Prostate Symptom Score when compared with the naftopidil group . Both silodosin and naftopidil showed no significant effect on International Index of Erectile Function-5 . A total of 23 sexually active patients in the silodosin group experienced more ejaculatory impairment than 21 patients in the naftopidil group , with a decrease of ejaculation volume ( 87 % vs 40 % , P = 0.003 ) , prolonged time to ejaculation ( 56 % vs 33 % , P = 0.027 ) and decrease of orgasm ( 50 % vs 39 % , P = 0.027 ) . These results suggest that alpha-1A selective blockers are more effective for voiding symptoms , whereas alpha-1D selective blockers offer a minor degree of ejaculatory dysfunction
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
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 A1d receptor that may have advantages in treating LUTS in this setting .
This is an up date of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009 .
Since that time , several large r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) have been reported , making this up date relevant .
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effects of naftopidil for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH .