Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan 10;13(1):130.
doi: 10.3390/microorganisms13010130.

Probiotics in the Management of Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis Patients: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial to Evaluate a Possible Link Between Gut Microbiota Restoring and Symptom Relief

Cristina Vocca  1 , Diana Marisol Abrego-Guandique  1 , Erika Cione  2 , Vincenzo Rania  1 , Gianmarco Marcianò  1 , Caterina Palleria  1 , Luca Catarisano  1 , Manuela Colosimo  3 , Gregorio La Cava  4 , Italo Michele Palumbo  5 , Giovambattista De Sarro  1   6 , Tommaso Ceccato  7 , Simone Botti  7 , Tommaso Cai  7   8 , Alessandro Palmieri  9 , Luca Gallelli  1   6   10
Affiliations

Probiotics in the Management of Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis Patients: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial to Evaluate a Possible Link Between Gut Microbiota Restoring and Symptom Relief

Cristina Vocca et al. Microorganisms. .

Abstract

Several studies have suggested that probiotics could play a role in the management of patients with chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP). In this randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of consumption of probiotics containing human Lactobacillus casei DG® as an add-on treatment in patients with clinical recurrences of CBP, through gut microbiota modification analysis. Enrolled patients with CBP were randomized to receive for 3 months probiotics containing human Lactobacillus casei DG® or placebo following 1 month treatment with ciprofloxacin. During the enrollment and follow-ups, urological examinations analyzed symptoms and quality of life, while microbiological tests analyzed gut and seminal microbiota. During the study, the development of adverse drug reactions was evaluated through the Naranjo scale. Twenty-four patients with CBP were recruited and treated for 3 months with placebo (n. 12) or with Lactobacillus casei DG® (n. 12). Lactobacillus casei DG® induced a significantly (p < 0.01) faster recovery of symptoms than placebo (2 days vs. 8 days) and an increased time free from symptoms (86 days vs. 42 days) without the occurrence of adverse events. In the probiotic group, the appearance of Lactobacilli after 30 days (T1) was higher vs. the placebo group, and a significant reduction in Corynebacterium, Peptoniphilus, Pseudomonas, Veillonella, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus was also observed. These preliminary data suggest that in patients with CBP, the use of Lactobacillus casei DG after an antimicrobial treatment improves the days free of symptoms and the quality of life, without the development of adverse drug reactions.

Keywords: Lactobacillus casei DG; antibiotic resistance; chronic bacterial prostatitis; microbiota; probiotics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Gut microbiota analysis during the study in probiotic group. T0: admission; T1: 1 month from T0; T2: 3 months from T0; T3: 6 months from T0. ** p < 0.01 increase (T1 vs. T0; T2 vs. T1; T3 vs. T2).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Gut microbiota analysis during follow-ups in placebo group. T0: admission; T1: 1 month from T0; T2: 3 months from T0; T3: 6 months from T0. ** p < 0.01 increase (T1 vs. T0; T2 vs. T1; T3 vs. T2).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Seminal microbiota analysis was performed during follow-up in the probiotic group. T0: admission; T1: 1 month from T0; T2: 3 months from T0; T3: 6 months from T0. ** p < 0.01 increase (T1 vs. T0; T2 vs. T1; T3 vs. T2); ++ p < 0.01decrease (T1 vs. T0).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Seminal microbiota analysis during the study in placebo group. T0: admission; T1: 1 month from T0; T2: 3 months from T0; T3: 6 months from T0. ** p < 0.01 increase (T1 vs. T0; T2 vs. T1; T3 vs. T2); ++ p < 0.01 decrease (T1 vs. T0; T2 vs. T1).
Figure 5
Figure 5
NIH-CPSI analysis during follow-ups in the placebo and probiotic groups. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. T0: admission; T1: 30 days after T0, T2: 90 days after T0; T3: end of the study at 180 days after T0 ** p < 0.01 vs. T0.
Figure 6
Figure 6
IPSS analysis during follow-ups in the placebo and probiotic groups. T0: admission; T1: 30 days after T0, T2: 90 days after T0; T3: end of the study at 180 days after T0. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. ** p < 0.01 vs. T0.
Figure 7
Figure 7
SF-36 analysis during follow-ups in the placebo and probiotic groups. T0: admission; T1: 30 days after T0, T2: 90 days after T0; T3: end of the study at 180 days after T0. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. * p < 0.05 vs. T0; ** p < 0.01 vs. T0.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Zung SAS analysis during follow-ups in placebo and probiotic groups. T0: admission; T1: 30 days after T0, T2: 90 days after T0; T3: end of the study at 180 days after T0. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. * p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Zung SDS analysis during follow-ups in the placebo and probiotic groups. T0: admission; T1: 30 days after T0, T2: 90 days after T0; T3: end of the study at 180 days after T0. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. ** p < 0.01 vs. T0.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rees J., Abrahams M., Doble A., Cooper A. Diagnosis and treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A consensus guideline. BJU Int. 2015;116:509–525. doi: 10.1111/bju.13101. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cai T., Alidjanov J., Palagin I., Medina-Polo J., Nickel J.C., Wagenlehner F.M.E. Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS): Look to the future. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2024;27:239–241. doi: 10.1038/s41391-023-00645-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krieger J.N., Wen S., Lee H., Jeon J., Cheah P.Y., Long M., Riley D.E. Epidemiology of prostatitis. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 2008;31:85–90. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.08.028. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bartoletti R., Cai T., Nesi G., Albanese S., Meacci F., Mazzoli S., Naber K. The impact of biofilm-producing bacteria on chronic bacterial prostatitis treatment: Results from a longitudinal cohort study. World J. Urol. 2014;32:737–742. doi: 10.1007/s00345-013-1145-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Magri V., Boltri M., Cai T., Colombo R., Cuzzocrea S., De Visschere P., Giuberti R., Granatieri C.M., Latino M.A., Larganà G., et al. Multidisciplinary approach to prostatitis. Arch. Ital. Urol. Androl. 2019;90:227–248. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2018.4.227. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources