Effect of Tamsulosin Alone & Tamsulosin- Dutasteride Combination Therapy on Sexual Function in Men with Benign Prostatic Enlargement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47489/szmc.v39i3.781Keywords:
Tamsulosin, Dutasteride, Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Benign Prostatic Enlargement, Ejaculatory dusfunctionAbstract
Background: Benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) is frequently observed in aging men. An association exists between lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and sexual dysfunction resulting from BPE.
Objective: To compare the effect of Tamsulosin alone and Dutasteride in combination with Tamsulosin on men’s sexual
function (ejaculatory function, libido) for managing LUTS secondary to BPE.
Method: This quasi-experimental study was carried out at department of Urology, Nishtar Hospital Multan (2021-22) on 138 BPE patients in 2 equal groups. Group A was given Tamsulosin (0.4mg) and group B received combination of Tamsulosin and Dutasteride (0.4mg/0.5mg) at bedtime. Patients were followed in OPD at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of study and each patient filled questionnaires on every visit of international prostate scoring system (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and Premature Ejaculation diagnostic tool (PEDT) to assess the sexual adverse effects. Data was analyzed in SPSS v25 using t-test for quantitative and chi-square for qualitative variables; p ? 0.05 was considered significant. Ethical approval was obtained from institutional committee.
Results: Mean IPSS score in group A was 9.63±2.69 and in group B was 7.57±2.18 (p-value=<0.001). The mean Erectile dysfunction score in group A was 15.78±3.17 and in group B was 9.29±1.76 (p-value=<0.001). The mean ejaculation dysfunction score in group A was 8.92±2.19 and in group B was 12.39±2.02 (p-value=<0.001).
Conclusion: While treating LUTS in patients with BPE, although combination therapy of Tamsulosin and Dutasteride is better, it has significant adverse effects on sexual activity compared to Tamsulosin monotherapy.
References
Charalampous I, Tsikopoulos I, Mitkani C, Samarinas M, Yuan Y, Vouros I, et al. Does surgical treatment for benign prostate enlargement (BPE)-related bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) benefit patients with central nervous system diseases? A systematic review. J Clin Med. 2024;13(19):5846-62. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13195846
Sciacqua LV, Vanzulli A, Di Meo R, Pellegrino G, Lavorato R, Vitale G. Minimally invasive treatment in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2023;22(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/15330338231155000
McVary KT, Roehrborn CG, Kaminetsky JC, Roehrborn P, Dmochowski R, Kaplon DM, et al. Comparing the durability of improvements in lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia with prostatic urethral lift and convective water vapor thermal therapy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2025;25(1):34-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.022
Sut M, Amiel J, Robert G, Misrai V, Rijo E, Gratzke C, et al. Prostatic artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: systematic review, meta-analysis, and indirect comparisons. BMJ. 2025;389:Q3316. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q3316
Elshal AM, Elmansy HM. Prostatic urethral lift versus prostatic artery embolization: which technique for which patient? Curr Opin Urol. 2024;34(1):64-71. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000001214
Aoun F, Marcelis Q, Roumeguere T. Treating benign prostatic hyperplasia with embolization: pearls and pitfalls. Asian J Urol. 2018;5(1):33-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2017.11.004
Malling B, Røder MA, Brasso K, Forman J, Taudorf M, Lönn L, et al. Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(1):287-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5577-9
Sun F, Crisóstomo V, Báez-Díaz C, Usón J, Sánchez FM, de la Torre J, et al. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: transcatheter arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate – a prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical trial. Radiology. 2018;288(1):160-8. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018171370
Abt D, Hechelhammer L, Müllhaupt G, Markart S, Güsewell S, Kessler TM, et al. Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2018;361:k2338. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2338
Loh CT, McNally D, Powell J, Guy A, Hamady M. Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2021;44(4):556-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02745-3
Bouissou J, Makhloufi C, Blanchard P, Bazin C, Mordasini L, Millet I, et al. MRI follow-up after prostate artery embolization: best protocol to assess volume reduction and imaging predictor of clinical success. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2021;102(5):267-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2021.02.004
Schuster T, Aning J, MacDonald R, Wilt TJ. Prostatic arterial embolization for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;2019(11):CD012867. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012867.pub2
Insausti I, Sáez de Ocáriz A, Galbete A, Salvador M, Zudaire JJ. Prostatic artery embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. BMC Urol. 2020;20(1):134. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00731-3
Jiang YL, Qian LJ, Tu W, Lu YT, Lv XF, Ding WQ, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization with small-sized particles for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to large (>80 mL) benign prostatic hyperplasia: preliminary results. Chin Med J (Engl). 2018;131(12):1464-70. https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.232806
Deng T, Guo L, Pan T, Xu X, Zheng X, Jin X, et al. Prostatic artery embolization with small versus large particles for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective randomized study. Urol Int. 2017;99(1):77-82. https://doi.org/10.1159/000455174
Malling B, Røder MA, Brasso K, Taudorf M, Lönn L, Forman J, et al. Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: midterm results in 100 patients. BJU Int. 2017;119(5):767-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13742
Gong B, Ma M, Yang Q, Fu H, Wang Z, Cao S, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2016;34(9):1207-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1790-7
Jones P, Rajkumar GN, Rai BP, Aboumarzouk O, Cleaveland P, Srirangam SJ, et al. Medium-term outcomes of Urolift (minimum 12 months follow-up): evidence from a systematic review. Urology. 2016;97(1):20-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.05.003
Abdel Raheem A, Johnson M, Abdel-Rahman A, Abou-Taleb H, Rashed A, Dabous A, et al. Long-term durability of the prostatic urethral lift: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arab J Urol. 2019;17(2):130-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/2090598X.2019.1608474
Shah T, Kasivisvanathan V, Armitage J, Spaliviero M, Kinsella J, El-Hakim A, et al. Randomised controlled trial of Urolift versus standard transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic obstruction: two-year outcomes. Eur Urol. 2021;79(6):815-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.12.018
Perera M, Roberts MJ, Doi SA, Bolton DM, Lawrentschuk N. Prostatic urethral lift improves urinary symptoms and flow while preserving sexual function for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2015;67(4):704-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.031
This work is licensed under a 