PURPOSE:Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a condition of uncertain etiology and treatment is often unsatisfactory. There is evidence that the symptom complex may result from pelvic floor muscular dysfunction and/or neural hypersensitivity/inflammation. We hypothesized that the application of electromagnetic therapy may have a neuromodulating effect on pelvic floor spasm and neural hypersensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following full Stamey localization men with National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseasescategory III prostatitis were prospectively randomized to receive active electromagnetic or placebo therapy. Active therapy consisted of 15 minutes of pelvic floor stimulation at a frequency of 10 Hz, followed by a further 15 minutes at 50 Hz, twice weekly for 4 weeks. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3 months and 1 year after treatment using validated visual analog scores. RESULTS: A total of 21 men with a mean age of 47.8 years (range 25 to 67) were analyzed. Mean symptom scores decreased significantly in the actively treated group at 3 months and 1 year (p <0.05), unlike the placebo group, which showed no significant change (p >0.05). Subanalysis of those receiving active treatment showed that the greatest improvement was in pain related symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The novel use of pelvic floor electromagnetic therapy may be a promising new noninvasive option for chronic pelvic pain syndrome in men.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Male chronic pelvic pain syndrome is a condition of uncertain etiology and treatment is often unsatisfactory. There is evidence that the symptom complex may result from pelvic floor muscular dysfunction and/or neural hypersensitivity/inflammation. We hypothesized that the application of electromagnetic therapy may have a neuromodulating effect on pelvic floor spasm and neural hypersensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following full Stamey localization men with National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases category III prostatitis were prospectively randomized to receive active electromagnetic or placebo therapy. Active therapy consisted of 15 minutes of pelvic floor stimulation at a frequency of 10 Hz, followed by a further 15 minutes at 50 Hz, twice weekly for 4 weeks. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3 months and 1 year after treatment using validated visual analog scores. RESULTS: A total of 21 men with a mean age of 47.8 years (range 25 to 67) were analyzed. Mean symptom scores decreased significantly in the actively treated group at 3 months and 1 year (p <0.05), unlike the placebo group, which showed no significant change (p >0.05). Subanalysis of those receiving active treatment showed that the greatest improvement was in pain related symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The novel use of pelvic floor electromagnetic therapy may be a promising new noninvasive option for chronic pelvic pain syndrome in men.