versus common uropathogens as a cause of chronic bacterial prostatitis: Is there any difference? Results of a prospective parallel-cohort study.

The role of (CT) infection in chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP) is well known. What is unclear is whether there are any differences in the course or clinical outcome of the disease when the cause is CT or other uropathogens.A series of 311 patients affected by CBP due to CT (cohort A) was compared with a group of 524 patients affected by CBP caused by common uropathogen bacteria (cohort B). All participants completed the following questionnaires: National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function-15 erectile function domain (IIEF-15-EFD), Premature Ejaculation Diagnostic Tool (PEDT), and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey. All patients were followed with clinical and microbiological evaluations.After a mean follow-up time of 42.3 months, the number of symptomatic episodes was significantly higher in patients in cohort A than in cohort B (4.1±1.1 vs. 2.8±0.8, p<0.001), and the mean time to first symptomatic recurrence was shorter in cohort A than in cohort B (3.3±2.3 months vs. 5.7±1.9 months, p<0.001). Moreover, scores on the SF-36 tool were significantly lower in cohort A (96.5±1.0 vs. 99.7±1.9, p<0.001) at the first symptomatic recurrence. Cohort A also showed significantly lower scores on the IIEF-15-EFD and PEDT questionnaires at the end of the follow-up period (26.8±2.9 vs. 27.3±3.3, p=0.02 and 11.5±2.3 vs. 4.5±2.8, p<0.001, respectively).Patients affected by CBP due to CT infection have a higher number of symptomatic recurrences with a more severe impact on quality of life.