You have to login first.
Prostaphil-2 is a product designed to relieve symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Its main ingredient is defined pollen extract, which is not the same thing as bee pollen. Bee pollen is a random mixture of whatever pollens the insects happen to have come into contact with, while defined pollen extract is a very specific mixture of pollens from several cereal grasses in particular.
Prostaphil-2 has been clinically shown to reduce the enlarged prostate and lower levels of PSA (prostate-specific antigen), an indicator of both BPH and of prostate cancer. Other natural therapies used for prostate issues such as saw palmetto and others merely relieve the symptoms of BPH without reducing the size of the prostate. Unlike these herbs, defined pollen extract addresses the fundamental problem by reducing the size of the enlarged prostate, an effect that has not been demonstrated by any other herbal remedy. Prostaphil-2 is also a powerful anti-inflammatory, bringing relief for those who suffer from painful conditions such as prostatodynia and prostatitis.
Research suggests that defined pollen extract can also support detoxification and liver protection. Furthermore, in some parts of the world, the extract is used by more women than men because they have found the extract to be useful for the relief of urinary incontinence. Men who suffer from the uncomfortable urinary symptoms of BPH or the pain of inflammatory prostate conditions, and women suffering from urinary incontinence, can benefit greatly from taking AOR Prostaphil-2.
Prostaphil-2™ is defined pollen extract, which is not bee pollen, but a defined blend of water and fat-soluble extracts from specific pollens in characteristic ratios first crafted in Sweden. Research demonstrates defined pollen extract’s superior support for prostate health compared to saw palmetto and other common prostate herbals. Protsaphil-2™ helps relieve nocturia and sensation of residual urine symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and pain associated with chronic non-bacterial prostatitis.
|Serving Size: 1 Capsule||Amount||% Daily|
|Defined Pollen extract (1.7-3.7:1)||46 mg|
*Prostaphil-2™ is a trademark of Pfannenschmidt Ltd.
microcrystalline cellulose, dicalcium phosphate, calcium gluconate, silicon dioxide, maltodextrin, sodium stearyl fumarate. Capsule: hypromellose.
AOR™ guarantees that all ingredients have been declared on the label. Contains no wheat, gluten, nuts, peanuts, sesame seeds, sulphites, mustard, soy, dairy, eggs, fish or shellfish.
Take 1 capsule three times daily with/without food, or as directed by a qualified health care practitioner. Use for a minimum of 12 weeks to see beneficial effects.
Do not use if you are allergic to flower pollen. Consult a health care practitioner prior to use to exclude a diagnosis of prostate cancer or if symptoms persist or worsen with use. May cause mild gastrointestinal discomfort or nausea. Hypersensitivity has been known to occur; in which case, discontinue use.
Pollen extract - Secale cereale, Zea mays, Phleum pratense
BPH (benign prostate hyperplasia)
Urinary tract support
The information and product descriptions appearing on this website are for information purposes only, and are not intended to provide or replace medical advice to individuals from a qualified health care professional. Consult with your physician if you have any health concerns, and before initiating any new diet, exercise, supplement, or other lifestyle changes.
The Real Prostate Health Alternative
Prostaphil-2™ containing defined pollen extract is different. Defined pollen extract is not bee pollen. Bee pollen is a mixture of whatever pollens with which the insects happen to have come into contact. Defined pollen extract, by contrast, is a mixture of several specific pollen sources (primarily rye, corn and timothy-grass). Also, bee pollen in its raw form is covered with a microscopic husk which prevents its full assimilation by humans; by contrast, defined pollen extract uses a precise process to isolate the key fractions from the pollen, incorporating a specific 20:1 ratio of lipid-soluble and water-soluble components extracted under low-temperature conditions, bypassing the pollen’s protective sheath.
In contrast to saw palmetto and the other standard prostate botanicals, four randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials have shown that Prostaphil-2™ quickly improves prostate symptoms of an enlarged prostate (BPH) by reducing prostate volume and reducing inflammation related to prostatitis.
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) - the non-cancerous swelling of the prostate gland, leading to discomfort, nocturia (the need to get up in the middle of the night for a trip to the bathroom), frequent and sudden urges to urinate even when the bladder is not full, intermittency (dribbling at the end of the urinary stream), and incomplete emptying of the bladder when urinating – affects nearly all men to some degree beginning in late middle age. Saw palmetto, along with stinging nettle, Pygeum africanum, beta-sitosterol, and a few other herbals, is reached for in health food stores across North America almost by reflex. And there is evidence that these botanicals improve the symptoms of BPH.
However, these herbs don’t address the fundamental problem: the actual increase in the volume of the prostate gland itself. Despite what you hear, clinical trials have repeatedly documented that saw palmetto has no effect on prostate volume.
The Verdict on Saw Palmetto: Symptomatic Relief
The German Commission E Monographs are careful to spell this out, if most supplement hawkers are not: saw palmetto “relieves only the symptoms associated with an enlarged prostate without reducing the enlargement.” And it’s the same with the other herbal treatments. Because of this, the Monograph for saw palmetto advises users to “Please consult a physician at regular intervals.” The reason: even as their symptoms are relieved, saw palmetto allows the prostate to continue to grow, so that surgery may eventually become necessary.
The Pharmaceutical Approach: A Win-Lose
Indeed, experience with drugs which relieve BPH symptoms without addressing prostate volume (such as alpha 1-adrenergic blockers (eg Hytrin® or Flomax®)) has shown that, lacking any warning symptoms, men often put off surgery for far too long, leading to concern that these treatments may actually increase the complications of BPH.
By contrast, there is plenty of evidence that finasteride (Proscar®), the most famous drug therapy for BPH, can reduce prostate volume. Unfortunately, finasteride takes a long time to relieve symptoms, does not work with several classes of patients, is very expensive, and has significant side effects, including erectile dysfunction and loss of libido. Furthermore, despite long-standing hopes that this drug would reduce the risk of prostate cancer because of its ability to reduce levels of the cancer marker prostate-specific antigen (PSA), the first clinical trial to test this hypothesis has found that finasteride has pretty muddled results: it decreases the overall risk of prostate disease – but increases the risk of the most aggressive, deadly forms of the disease.
Other Prostate Health Concerns
BPH, of course, is not the only prostate disorder that men may face. Others include chronic prostatitis (CP) and prostatodynia. Because the symptoms of these disorders sound similar, many men with CP or prostatodynia mistakenly self-medicate with saw palmetto. And unfortunately, the relative ignorance of many mainstream MDs about the herbal pharmacy leads them to give the go-ahead for this useless course of action – useless, because there is no evidence that saw palmetto or the other common herbals for BPH are helpful for these conditions. Several studies have found that defined pollen extract is helpful in chronic prostatitis and prostatodynia, and there is also hope that defined pollen extract could potentially protect against more serious prostate problems since BPH is a risk factor for this unfortunate common disease.
Proven in Controlled Trials
In one study, sixty men with symptomatic BPH received either the pollen extract or placebo for six months. Sixty-nine percent of men receiving the pollen extract experienced improved overall symptoms, compared to less than a third of the placebo group. There were statistically significant differences in the number of incidences of nocturia, decreased leftover urine in the bladder after urination (“residual urine volume”). Compared to the placebo group, there were also more improvements reported by men receiving the pollen extract in hesitancy (inability to release urinary flow) and intermittency, but these results were not strong enough, in this small a group over this short a period, to be statistically meaningful. But most importantly, this study reported that men using defined pollen extract experience significant reductions in the volume of the prostate as measured by ultrasound. In fact, every trial of defined pollen extract in men with BPH, which has measured prostate volume, size, or weight has reported significant reductions in the gland.
Another study administered defined pollen extract to men with BPH for 3 months, while some men continued with the treatment for a year. Flow rate and residual volume improved significantly after 3 months, while the7 cm3 reduction in prostate size was not noticeable until 1 year. This means that the symptoms improved in the first few months but the prostate size began to shrink sometime between 3 months and 1 year.
A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 100 men with BPH found that defined pollen extract improved nocturia in 69% of the men compared to 37% of those taking the placebo. After 6 weeks, peak urine flow rate was 3.3ml/sec for the pollen group and 0.9ml/sec for the placebo group. In the pollen group, residual urine volume continually decreased over 12 weeks; the placebo group actually experienced an increase between 6 and 12 weeks.
Over 2000 men with either prostatitis, BPH or the two combined were given defined pollen extract for 12 weeks. Prostate size, flow rate, residual volume and leukocyte presence (an inflammatory marker) decreased in all groups.
Defined Pollen Extract vs Pygeum africanum
Defined pollen extract has been found superior to Pygeum africanum, another common prostate supplement. A study compared the effects of Cernilton, a defined pollen extract, against Pygeum africanum for 4 months in about 90 men with BPH. 78% of the men taking the pollen extract reported symptom relief while only 55% did in the Pygeum group. The Cernilton group experienced increases in flow rate and decreases in residual urine and in prostate volume.
Defined Pollen Extract vs Paraprost
When these two prostate products were compared in about 160 men with BPH over 4 weeks, both the subjects and the physicians evaluated defined pollen extract as slightly more effective than Paraprost. Paraprost is a mixture of three amino acids.
Defined Pollen Extract vs Beta-Sitosterol
In a comparative study, subjective symptoms improved more with the pollen extract, and the latter also reduced prostate alkaline phosphatase (PAP) and prostate specific antigen (PSA), markers of prostate lesions, while beta-sitosterol did not reduce these markers.
The effectiveness of saw palmetto for prostate problems has become controversial. While some studies have shown some reduction in symptoms, others have not. The most recent trial, a dose escalation study which was implemented due to a lack of significant findings in a large study, administered up to 960 mg of saw palmetto over 72 weeks. They found that saw palmetto didn’t lower PSA levels.
Proscar® and some other drugs for BPH are effective, but come with side effects and a cost which make drug therapy unattractive to many men. Other drugs like Flomax® or natural alternatives commonly found on health food store shelves like Saw Palmetto may help relieve symptoms, but do not ultimately address the underlying cause, can lead to severe long-term issues.
So men are left with a choice: symptomatic improvement with no halt to the loss of prostate health, or a treatment which addresses the core problem, but causes problems of its own.
But there is another solution!
Defined pollen extract has been effectively helping European men with many prostate health problems for decades now, and is proven to do what no other herbal can: shrink enlarged prostates. While relatively new in North America, defined pollen extract has been successfully used in Europe for two generations, and clinical trials have proven its superiority to other prostate supplements. As the pollen itself is golden, so defined pollen extract may open up a golden age for safe, natural therapy for the most personal of male health concerns. AOR’s Prostaphil-2 provides an exciting solution for prostate problems.
Andriole GL, McCullum-Hill C, Sandhu GS, Crawford ED, Barry MJ, Cantor A; CAMUS Study Group. The effect of increasing doses of saw palmetto fruit extract on serum prostate specific antigen: analysis of the CAMUS randomized trial. J Urol. 2013 Feb;189(2):486-92.
Becker H, Ebeling L. Phytotherapy of BPH with cernilton N – results of a controlled prospective study. Urologe (B) 1991; 31: 113-6.
Blumenthal M (ed). The Complete German Commission E Monographs. Therapeutic Guide to Herbal Medicines. Austin, TX: American Botanical Council, 1998.
Brauer H. The treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with phytopharmata: a comparative study of cernilton vs. beta-sitosterol. Therapiewoche. 1986; 36: 1686-96.
Buck AC, Cox R, Rees RW, Ebeling L, John A. Treatment of outflow tract obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia with the pollen extract, cernilton. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Br J Urol. 1990 Oct; 66(4): 398-404.
Dutkiewicz S. Usefulness of Cernilton in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int Urol Nephrol. 1996; 28(1): 49-53.
Ebeling L. Therapeutic results of defined pollen-extract in patients with chronic prostatis or BPH accompanied by chronic prostatitis. In , Schmiedt E, Alken JE, Bauer HW (eds). Therapy of Prostatitis. Munich: Zuckerschwerdt Verlag, 1986; 154-60.
Jaton JC, Roulin K, Rose K, Sirotnak FM, Lewenstein A, Brunner G, Fankhauser CP, Burger U. The secalosides, novel tumor cell growth inhibitory glycosides from a pollen extract. J Nat Prod. 1997 Apr; 60(4): 356-60.
Maekawa M, Kishimoto T, Yasumoto R, Wada S, Harada T, Ohara T, Okajima E, Hirao Y, Ohzono S, Shimada K, et al. Clinical evaluation of cernilton on benign prostatic hypertrophy – a multiple center double-blind study with Paraprost. Hinyokika Kiyo. 1990 Apr; 36(4): 495-516.
Roberts KP, Iyer RA, Prasad G, Liu LT, Lind RE, Hanna PE. Cyclic hydroxamic acid inhibitors of prostate cancer cell growth: selectivity and structure activity relationships. Prostate. 1998 Feb 1; 34(2): 92-9.
Yasumoto R, Kawanishi H, Tsujino T, Tsujita M, Nishisaka N, Horii A, Kishimoto T. Clinical evaluation of long-term treatment using cernitin pollen extract in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clin Ther. 1995 Jan-Feb; 17(1): 82-7.
Zhang X, Habib FK, Ross M, Burger U, Lewenstein A, Rose K, Jaton JC. Isolation and characterization of a cyclic hydroxamic acid from a pollen extract, which inhibits cancerous cell growth in vitro. J Med Chem. 1995 Feb 17; 38(4): 735-8.
The effect of increasing doses of saw palmetto fruit extract on serum prostate specific antigen: analysis of the CAMUS randomized trial.
J Urol. 2013 Feb;189(2):486-92.
Andriole GL, McCullum-Hill C, Sandhu GS, Crawford ED, Barry MJ, Cantor A; CAMUS Study Group.
PURPOSE: Saw palmetto extracts are used to treat lower urinary tract symptoms in men despite level I evidence that saw palmetto is ineffective in reducing these lower urinary tract symptoms. We determined whether higher doses of saw palmetto as studied in the CAMUS (Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Urologic Symptoms) trial affect serum prostate specific antigen levels.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CAMUS trial was a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind, multicenter, North American trial conducted between June 5, 2008 and October 10, 2012, in which 369 men older than 45 years with an AUA symptom score of 8 to 24 were randomly assigned to placebo or dose escalation of saw palmetto, which consisted of 320 mg for the first 24 weeks, 640 mg for the next 24 weeks and 960 mg for the last 24 weeks of this 72-week trial. Serum prostate specific antigen levels were obtained at baseline and at weeks 24, 48 and 72, and were compared between treatment groups using the pooled t test and Fisher’s exact test.
RESULTS: Serum prostate specific antigen was similar at baseline for the placebo (mean ± SD 1.93 ± 1.59 ng/ml) and saw palmetto groups (2.20 ± 1.95, p = 0.16). Changes in prostate specific antigen during the study were similar, with a mean change in the placebo group of 0.16 ± 1.08 ng/ml and 0.23 ± 0.83 ng/ml in the saw palmetto group (p = 0.50). In addition, no differential effect on serum prostate specific antigen was observed between treatment arms when the groups were stratified by baseline prostate specific antigen.
CONCLUSIONS: Saw palmetto extract does not affect serum prostate specific antigen more than placebo, even at relatively high doses.
Usefulness of Cernilton in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Int Urol Nephrol 1996; 28(1): 49-53.
A total of 89 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated pharmacologically for 4 months: 51 received Cernilton and 38 Tadenan [Pygeum africanum] (controls). Significant subjective improvement was found in 78% of the patients in the Cernilton group compared to only 55% of the Tadenan-treated patients. The obstructive and irritative symptoms responded best to the therapy. In the Cernilton-treated patients a significant improvement in the uroflow rate, decrease in residual urine and in prostate volume were found. This study shows that Cernilton is an effective therapy for patients with BPH.
Clinical evaluation of long-term treatment using cernitin pollen extract in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Clin Ther 1995 Jan-Feb; 17(1): 82-7.
Yasumoto R, Kawanishi H, Tsujino T, Tsujita M, Nishisaka N, Horii A, Kishimoto T
Seventy-nine patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated with cernitin pollen extract. Patient ages ranged from 62 to 89 years (mean, 68 years). Mean baseline prostatic volume was 33.2 cm3. Cernitin pollen extract was administered in a dosage of 126 mg (2 tablets, 63 mg each), three times a day, for more than 12 weeks. Symptom scores, based on a modified Boyarsky scoring scale, uroflowmetry, prostatic volume, residual urine volume, and urinalysis results were examined before and after administration of cernitin pollen extract. Symptom scores significantly decreased from baseline, and the favorable results continued during the treatment period. Urine maximum flow rate and average flow rate increased significantly from 9.3 mL/s to 11 mL/s and from 5.1 mL/s to 6 mL/s, respectively. Residual urine volume decreased significantly from 54.2 mL to less than 30 mL. There was no change in prostatic volume. However, 28 patients treated for more than 1 year showed a mean decrease of prostatic volume to 26.5 cm3. No adverse reactions were observed. Clinical efficacy at 12 weeks was rated excellent, good, satisfactory, and poor in 11%, 39%, 35%, and 15% of patients, respectively. Overall clinical efficacy was 85%. In conclusion, cernitin pollen extract showed a mild beneficial effect on prostatic volume and urination variables in patients with symptomatic BPH.
Phytotherapy of BPH with cernilton N – results of a controlled prospective study.
Urologe (B) 1991; 31: 113-6.
Becker H, Ebeling L.
The efficacy and tolerance of the pollen extract preparation, Cernilton N, were investigated in a double blind, placebo-controlled study carried out over a treatment period of 12 weeks in 6 urological practices, in a total of 103 patients suffering from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in stages II and III. The investigational parameters were the disturbances of micturition classified according to the FDA recommendation, residual urine volume, palpation findings, uroflow as well as the global assessment of the therapy by the physician and by the patient. Under the pollen extract, nocturia, the principal symptom of BPH, improved in 68.8% of the cases, compared with 37.2% under the placebo medication. Notable differences were observed in frequency and in sensation of residual urine, which were statistically significant as regards absence of these symptoms after the treatment, between the active treatment (AT) and placebo (Pl) (p=0.010 and p=0.016, respectively). Observation of the course of the symptoms after 6 weeks and 12 weeks showed higher rates of improvement under the active treatment, for all the individual symptoms. In the case of the urodynamic study parameters, similar changes were observed in the findings for all the uroflow parameters, whereby the differences between the comparative groups were unremarkable. At the control examination after 6 weeks a continuous increase in the peak urine flow was observed, averaging 3.3ml/sec under active treatment and 0.9ml/sec under placebo (p=0.060). The difference in the average decrease in the residual urine volume in the course of the treatment was statistically significant (AT/Pl: 24.3ml/3.7ml; p=0.006). The pollen extract led to a continuous reduction, whereas in the placebo group the residual urine after 12 weeks had increased in comparison with the value recorded after 6 weeks. Significant differences in the residual urine volumes before and after the treatment, in favor of the pollen extract, were observed also in the patients in BPH stage III (p=0.042). Prostate size and congestion showed higher response rates, in the sense of reduction in size and decongestion, as detected by palpitation, under the active treatment, with a marked trend (AT/Pl: 88.5%/69.0%; p=0.155). Nausea was recorded under active treatment in one case. In accordance with their positive experiences with the treatment, the investigating physicians and the patients assessed the therapeutic result under the pollen extract as very good or good significantly more often than that obtained under placebo (p=0.001). The results of the study prove the efficacy of the pollen extract in patients with BPH in stages II and III, in regard to clinical symptomatology, urodynamics and global assessment, and demonstrate the good tolerability of the drug, which permits long-term therapy with little risk of side effects.
Treatment of outflow tract obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia with the pollen extract, cernilton. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Br J Urol 1990 Oct; 66(4): 398-404.
Buck AC, Cox R, Rees RW, Ebeling L, John A.
Whilst prostatectomy remains the “gold standard” for the treatment of outflow tract obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia, medical treatment-if only for symptomatic relief–appears to be an attractive alternative. Most of the pharmacological agents in use block the hormonal or the sympathetic neurological pathways that influence prostate growth and function. All of these drugs are known to have side effects. Sixty patients with outflow obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were entered into a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of a 6-month course of the pollen extract, Cernilton. There was a statistically significant subjective improvement with Cernilton (69% of the patients) compared with placebo (30%). There was a significant decrease in residual urine in the patients treated with Cernilton and in the antero-posterior (A-P) diameter of the prostate on ultrasound. However, differences in respect of flow rate and voided volume were not statistically significant. It is concluded that Cernilton has a beneficial effect in BPH and may have a place in the treatment of patients with mild or moderate symptoms of outflow obstruction.
Clinical evaluation of cernilton on benign prostatic hypertrophy–a multiple center double-blind study with Paraprost.
Hinyokika Kiyo 1990 Apr; 36(4): 495-516.
Maekawa M, Kishimoto T, Yasumoto R, Wada S, Harada T, Ohara T, Okajima E, Hirao Y, Ohzono S, Shimada K, et al.
A multiple center double blind study was performed to study the effectiveness of Cernilton (CN) on benign prostatic hypertrophy in comparison to Paraprost (PP). Among a total of 192 patients, overall effect was studied on 159 patients, overall safety rate on 178 patients and rate of effectiveness on 159 patients. There were no differences between the two groups in the selected patients, criteria for exclusion and drop out cases or background data of the patients. Impression of patients and overall effect by committee and physician judgment were slightly higher in the CN group compared to the PP group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups. For the improvement in subjective symptoms, the rate of moderate improvement or more after 4 weeks by committee judgement was higher in the CN group compared to the PP group. The rate of improvement in protracted miction, which is an effective marker of urinary disturbance, was also higher in the CN group compared to the PP group. An analysis of objective symptoms showed a significant improvement in residual urinary volume, average flow rate, maximum flow rate and prostatic weight in the CN group. A significant improvement in the phased change of residual urinary volume was also seen in the CN group. No side effects or abnormalities in clinical test levels were noted in the CN group. By committee judgement, the rate of more than moderate effectiveness was 49.1% in the CN group compared to 41.2% in the PP group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups. By physician’s judgment, the rate of more than moderate effectiveness was 49.4% in the CN group compared to 46.3% in the PP group, but there was also no significant difference between the two groups. These results suggested that Cernilton was an effective drug for benign prostatic hypertrophy.
Therapeutic results of defined pollen-extract in patients with chronic prostatis or BPH accompanied by chronic prostatitis. In Schmiedt E, Alken JE, Bauer HW (eds).
Therapy of Prostatitis. Munich: Zuckerschwerdt Verlag, 1986; 154-60.
Objective(s): The purpose of this study was to control the acceptance and effectiveness of pollen-extract on patients with chronic prostatic complaints.
Study Population: 2,289 total patients prostatitis; 1,116 with BPH, 590 with BPH and prostatitis, 583 with chronic prostatitis alone
Study Design: Open field study. The subjects were divided into three groups, 583 cases chronic prostatitis (P), 590 cases BPH accompanied by prostatitis (BP), and 1116 cases BPH (B). The pollen-extract treatment was provided in 84% of the cases with a dosage of 3×2 tablets/day in the first week and continued in 78.5% with 3×2 tablets/day for up to 12-weeks. Palpation, residual urine volume, peak urine flow, urine volume voided, flow time and leukocytes in the prostatic secretions were performed before and after treatment.
Test Results: The palpated size of the prostate greatly disappeared in the BP-group and the B-group’s and the P-group’s reduction was 55.9%. The leukocytes in the pro-static secretion decreased significantly in all groups. The residual urine volume decreased in all stages and showed a continuous drop in the course of treatment. The peak urine flow rate increased in all groups with the urine volume flow voided increased and flow time was reduced. The general assessment of the patients and physicians was good to very good.
Side Effects: There was a mild and temporary GI tract upset in 66 cases and in 1.2% of the cases treatment was stopped.
Conclusion(s): The results of this study suggest the logical use of the pollen-extract in the treatment of nonpathogen dependent chronic prostatitis, prostatodynia. prostatic congestion. BPH with and without concomitant prostatitis and TURP-prostatitis.
The treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with phytopharmata: a comparative study of cernilton vs. beta-sitosterol.
Therapiewoche. 1986; 36: 1686-96.
The conservative tretment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has gained increasingly in significance in view of the increased life expectancy. In a controlled comparative study (n-39) with Cernilton and beta-sitosterol the course of treatment was objectified by clinical-chemical findings. The results demonstrate the marked improvement of symptoms and signs, whereas the regression of complaints was more pronounced under Cernilton. The significant decrease of prostate alkaline phosphatase (PAP) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) serum levels shows the reduction of cell lesions in BPH under the treatment with Cernilton. A comparable effect of beta-sitosterol could not be demonstrated. The relative lack of toxicity of both drugs can be confirmed by the biochemical data.
All rights Reserved. Copyright © by AOR 2019