Clinical study of prostant in treating chronic prostatitis.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Prostant in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Methods A randomized, double-blind, positive drug-controlled clinical trial method was applied in the study. Through clinical symptoms, signs and expressed prostate secretion (EPS) examination, 80 patients with prostatitis were recruited and randomized into a trial group (60 cases) and a control group (20 cases). The trial group was treated with Prostant, and the control group was treated with wild chrysanthemum suppository. After screening, treatment and follow-up, in the trial group and the control group, the observation on clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated, such as the clinical symptoms, signs, EPS examination, the national institute health-chronic prostatits symptom index (NIH-CPSI) and the blood routine, urine routine, stool routine, the function of liver and kindney, electrocardiograph examination and the side effects. Results After 4-week treatment, the total effective rate was 74.14% in the trial group and 40.0% in the control group, the efficacy of Prostant was superior to that of wild chrysanthemum suppository (P =0.006). There was significant difference in clinical symptoms and NIH-CPSI between pre-treatment and post-treatment in the trial group and the control group (P0.05, P0.01). Though there was remarkable difference between pre-treatment and post-treatment in WBC count in the EPS (P 0.01), no difference in decrease value of two groups (P =0.121). The tolerance to Prostant and wild chrysanthemum suppository showed no significant difference (P =0.269), and no serious side effects were recorded. Conclusion Prostant is effective and safe in treating chronic prostatitis and has good compliance.