Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Benign Prostate Diseases in Older Men

  • Omer Onur Cakir
  • Kevin T. McVaryEmail author


Benign prostatic hyperplasia is one of the most common urologic disorders among older men. Incidence and prevalence of BPH both increase with advancing age, although the condition should not be considered a normal or inevitable part of the aging process. A variety of pharmacologic, surgical and minimally invasive surgical therapies are available to treat this condition. This chapter reviews BPH in eldelry men including associated lower urinary tract symptoms and treatment outcomes in this population.


Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Lower Urinary Tract Symptom Prostate Volume International Prostate Symptom Score Bladder Outlet Obstruction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Population Division, DESA, United Nations. World population aging 1950–2050. Executive summary. Available at: Accessed 15 Feb 2010.
  2. 2.
    Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER). SEER data for 200–2004. Available at: Accessed 15 Feb 2010.
  3. 3.
    Guzzo T, Drach G. Major urologic problems on geriatrics: assessment and management. Med Clin North Am. 2011;95:253–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Urologic Diseases in America 2012. National Institutes of Health. BPH/LUTS and bladder stones. p. 48, table 2-2.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mazur D, Helfand B, McVary T. Influences of neuroregulatory factors on the development of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia and erectile dysfunction in aging men. Urol Clin North Am. 2012;39:77–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McVary KT, Roehrborn C, Avins A, et al. Update on AUA guideline on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2011;185:1793–803.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McVary KT, Roehrborn C, Avins A, et al. AUA guideline on the management of benign pros- tatic hyperplasia, chapter 1. AUA Education and Research; 2010., retrieved date 12.2.13.
  8. 8.
    Prchon L, P’ntarelli V, Bezerra E, et al. Quality of life in elderly men with aging symptoms and lower urinary tract symptoms. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:515–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roehrborn C. Male lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Med Clin North Am. 2011;95:87–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McNicholas, TA, Kirby RS, Lepor H. Chapter 92: Evaluation and Nonsurgical Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. In Wein A, Kavoussi L, Novick A, Partin A and Peters C: Campbell-Walsh Urology. 10th. Ed. 2011.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdel-Aziz S, Mamalis N. Intraoperative floppy iris syndrome. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2009;20:37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jacobsen S, Jacobson D, McGree M, et al. Sixteen year longitudinal changes in serum prostate-specific antigen levels: the Olmsted County Study. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87(1):34–40.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marberger MJ. Long-term effects of finasteride in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. PROWESS Study Group. Urology. 1998;51(5):677–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeud A, et al. Guidelines on the management of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), including benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). European Association of Urology. 2012.
  15. 15.
    McConnell JD, Bruskewitz R, Walsh P, et al. The effect of finasteride on the risk of acute urinary retention and the need for surgical treatment among men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med. 1998;338(9):557–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roehrborn CG, Siami P, Barkin J, CombAT Study Group, et al. The effects of dutasteride, tamsulosin and combination therapy on lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatic enlargement: 2-year results from the CombAT study. J Urol. 2008;179(2):616–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roehrborn CG, Siami P, Barkin J, CombAT Study Group, et al. The effects of combination therapy with dutasteride and tamsulosin on clinical outcomes in men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from the CombAT study. Eur Urol. 2010;57(1):123–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chang D, Campbell J. Intraoperative floppy iris syndrome associated with tamsulosin. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andriole G, Bruchovsky N, Chung LW, et al. Dihydrotestosterone and the prostate: the scientific rationale for 5a-reductase inhibitors in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2004;172(4 Pt 1):1399–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rittmaster RS, Norman RW, Thomas LN, et al. Evidence for atrophy and apoptosis in the prostates of men given finasteride. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1996;81(2):814–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Naslund MJ, Miner M. A review of the clinical efficacy and safety of 5á-reductase inhibitors for the enlarged prostate. Clin Ther. 2007;29(1):17–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boyle P, Gould AL, Roehrborn CG. Prostate volume predicts outcome of treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with finasteride: meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Urology. 1996;48(3):398–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roehrborn CG, Lukkarinen O, Mark S, et al. Long-term sustained improvement in symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia with the dual 5a-reductase inhibitor dutasteride: results of 4-year studies. BJU Int. 2005;96(4):572–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gittelman M, Ramsdell J, Young J, et al. Dutasteride improves objective and subjective disease measures in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia and modest or severe prostate enlargement. J Urol. 2006;176(3): 1045–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roehrborn CG. BPH progression: concept and key learning from MTOPS, ALTESS, COMBAT, and ALF-ONE. BJU Int. 2008;101 Suppl 3:17–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kirby RS, Vale J, Bryan J, et al. Long-term urodynamic effects of finasteride in benign prostatic hyperplasia: a pilot study. Eur Urol. 1993;24(1):20–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lepor H, Williford WO, Barry MJ, et al. The efficacy of terazosin, finasteride, or both in benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med. 1996;335(8):533–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kirby R, Roehrborn CG, Boyle P, et al. Prospective European doxazosin and combination therapy study investigators. Efficacy and tolerability of doxazosin and finasteride, alone or in combination, in treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: the prospective European doxazosin and combination therapy (PREDICT) trial. Urology. 2003;61(1):119–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Andersen JT, Ekman P, Wolf H, et al. Can finasteride reverse the progress of benign prostatic hyperplasia? A two-year placebo-controlled study. The Scandinavian BPH Study Group. Urology. 1995;46(5):631–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chess-Williams R, Chapple CR, Yamanishi T, et al. The minor population of M3-receptors mediate contraction of human detrusor muscle in vitro. J Auton Pharmacol. 2001;21(5–6):243–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Matsui M, Motomura D, Karasawa H, et al. Multiple functional defects in peripheral autonomic organs in mice lacking muscarinic acetylcholine receptor gene for the M3 subtype. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2000;97(17):9579–84.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Abrams P, Kaplan S, De Koning Gans H, et al. Safety and tolerability of tolterodine for the treatment of overactive bladder in men with bladder outlet obstruction. J Urol. 2006;175:999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gomes T, Juurlink D, Mamdani M. Comparative adherence to oxybutynin to tolterodine among older patients. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;68(1):97–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Paquettte A, Gou P, Tannenbaum C. Systematic review and meta-analysis: do clinical trials testing antimuscarinic agents for overactive bladder adequately measure central nervous systems adverse events ? J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59(7):1332–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Abrams P, Chapple C, Khoury S, et al. Evaluation and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in older men. J Urol. 2009;181(4):1779–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Madersbacher S, Alivizatos G, Nordling J, et al. EAU 2004 guidelines on assessment, therapy and follow-up of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPH guidelines). Eur Urol. 2004;46(5):547–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chapple CR, Issa MM, Woo H. Transurethral needle ablation (TUNA). A critical review of radiofrequency thermal therapy in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 1999;35(2):119–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Benoist N, Bigot P, Colombel P, et al. TUNA: clinical retrospective study addressing mid-term outcomes. Prog Urol. 2009;19(1):54–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schatzl G, Madersbacher S, Lang T, et al. The early postoperative morbidity of transurethral resection of the prostate and of four minimally invasive treatment alternatives. J Urol. 1997;158(1):105–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hoffman RM, Monga M, Elliot S, et al. Microwave thermotherapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(4):CD004135.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mattiasson A, Wagrell L, Schelin S, et al. Five-year follow-up of feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH: a prospective randomised multicenter study. Urology. 2007;69(1): 91–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    D’Ancona FC, van der Bij AK, Francisca EA, et al. The results of high energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy in patients categorized according to the American Society of Anaesthesiologists operative risk classification (ASA). Urology. 1999;53(2): 322–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yu X, Elliott SP, Wilt TJ, et al. Practice patterns in benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical therapy: the dramatic increase in minimally invasive technologies. J Urol. 2008;180(1):241–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bootsma A, Laguna Pes M, Geerlings S, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic procedures systematic review. Eur Urol. 2008;54(6):1270–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hahn RG. Smoking increases the risk of large scale fluid absorption during transurethral prostatic resection. J Urol. 2001;166(1):162–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Madersbacher S, Lackner J, Brossner C, et al. Reoperation, myocardial infarction and mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy: a nation-wide, long-term analysis of 23,123 cases. Eur Urol. 2005;47(4):499–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lourenco T, Armstrong N, N’Dow J, et al. Systematic review and economic modelling of effectiveness and cost utility of surgical treatments for men with benign prostatic enlargement. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12(35):1–146.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Madersbacher S, Marberger M. Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified? Br J Urol. 1999;83(3):227–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Issa MM. Technological advances in transurethral resection of the prostate: bipolar versus monopolar TURP. J Endourol. 2008;22(8):1587–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gilling PJ, Cass CB, Malcolm AR, et al. Combination Holmium and Nd: YAG laser ablation of the prostate: initial clinical experience. J Endourol. 1995;9(2):151–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Fraundorfer MR, Gilling PJ. Holmium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate combined with mechanical morcellation: preliminary results. Eur Urol. 1998;33(1): 69–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lourenco T, Pickard R, Vale L, Benign Prostatic Enlargement team, et al. Alternative approaches to endoscopic ablation for benign enlargement of the prostate: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2008;337:a449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kuntz RM, Lehrich K, Ahyai SA. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):160–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Heinrich E, Schiefelbein F, Schoen G. Technique and short-term outcome of green light laser (KTP,80W) vaporisation of the prostate. Eur Urol. 2007;52(6): 1632–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Malek R, Kuntzman R, Barrett D. Photoselective potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vaporization of the benign obstructive prostate: observations on long-term outcomes. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1344–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bouchier-Hayes DM, Anderson P, Van Appledorn S, et al. KTP laser versus transurethral resection: early results of a randomised trial. J Endourol. 2006;20(8): 580–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bouchier-Hayes DM, Van Appledorn S, Bugeja P, et al. A randomised trial of photoselective vaporisation of the prostate using the 80-W potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vs transurethral prostatectomy, with a 1-year follow-up. BJU Int. 2010;105(7):964–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Skolarikos A, Papachristou C, Athanasiadis G, et al. Eighteen-month results of a randomised prospective study comparing transurethral photoselective vaporisation with transvesical open enucleation for prostatic adenomas greater than 80 cc. J Endourol. 2008;22(10): 2333–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Naspro R, Suardi N, Salonia A, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up. Eur Urol. 2006;50(3):563–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    ElMalik EM, Ibrahim AI, Gahli AM, et al. Risk factors in prostatectomy bleeding: preoperative urinary infection is the only reversible factor. Eur Urol. 2000;37(2):199–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gratzke C, Schlenker B, Seitz M, et al. Complications and early postoperative outcome after open prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic enlargement: results of a prospective multicenter study. J Urol. 2007;177(4):1419–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Tubaro A, Carter S, Hind A, et al. A prospective study of the safety and efficacy of suprapubic transvesical prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2001;166(1):172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyNorthwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Division of Urology, Department of SurgerySouthern Illinois University School of MedicineSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations