SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • prostatitis;
  • chronic nonbacterial prostatitis;
  • prostatodynia;
  • chronic pelvic pain syndrome;
  • histopathology;
  • inflammation

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

Objective To develop a standardized histopathological classification system for chronic prostatitis (standardized description of prostatic inflammatory infiltrates) based on a literature review, extensive prospective evaluations in two recognized prostatitis research centres and widespread consensus of international urological centres identified as having major expertise or interest in chronic prostatitis.

Methods Relevant articles for review were identified by a Medline search undertaken by the Cochrane Review Group in Prostate Diseases and Urologic Malignancies, and cross-checking bibliographies of retrieved studies, reviews, book chapters and abstracts of the American Urological Association and International Prostatitis Collaborative Network Annual Meetings. Initial drafts were based on classification systems independently developed by the Prostatitis Research Centers at Queen's University in Canada and University of Washington in the USA. A collaborative draft was distributed to 20 urological/pathological clinical centres who participated in the North American Chronic Prostatitis Collaborative Research Network and First International Prostatitis Collaborative Network. A consensus classification system was then distributed to the participating panel for acceptance.

Results The literature review identified a reasonably consistent description of inflammatory infiltrate locations and patterns that were further incorporated into the draft based on the Queen's University and University of Washington proposals. Eighteen (90%) of the identified Prostatitis Centers participated in the revision of the draft and the final consensus process. The final consensus document classifies prostatic inflammation according to its extent and grade/severity in each tissue compartment (location).

Conclusion The consensus of the expert panel was that this classification system can be used in the evaluation of prostatic inflammation in prostate biopsies, transurethral resected prostate chips or prostatectomy specimens. A standardized accepted framework to describe histopathological prostate inflammation will prove useful in evaluating prostate disease.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

The histological term prostatitis implies the presence of pathological infiltration of the prostate by inflammatory cells, but the relationship of these findings with the clinical syndrome of prostatitis and other prostate diseases is only just emerging. A renewed interest in the pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of the chronic prostatitis syndromes emerged over the latter half of the 1990s. This trend in urological research is the result of pressure from patient advocacy groups, interest from industrial and government funding sources, and a recent awareness of the epidemiological scope of the problem. As the 20th century closed, much research activity was instigated, including new epidemiological studies [1,2], the development of a new consensus-based disease definition and classification system [3], establishment of proposed outcome measures [4], development of research guidelines for clinical studies for chronic prostatitis [5] and initiation of randomized controlled trials. However, the causes involved in these syndromes continue to evade sporadic research efforts. The roles of white blood cells, microorganisms, immunological mediators and their relationship with histopathological patterns and clinical scenarios remains poorly understood perhaps partly because of a lack of descriptive standardization of these variables. The objective of the present programme was to develop a standardized histopathological classification system for chronic prostatitis based on a literature review, extensive prospective evaluations in two recognized prostatitis research centres with revision based on the consensus of international urological centres identified as having major expertise or interest in chronic prostatitis.

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

Literature review

Articles were included for review if they evaluated histological evidence of inflammation in the prostate found in prostatitis syndromes, BPH, prostate cancer, infertility and other conditions (including incidental pathological findings in men with no lower urinary tract disease) that may be associated with prostatic inflammation (‘human studies’ and ‘English language’ literature). Articles were identified through Medline from 1979 to 1999, using the following exploded MeSH headings; prostatitis, chronic nonbacterial prostatitis, chronic abacterial prostatitis, chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS), and prostatodynia combined with ‘pathology’ and ‘histology; prostate’ combined with ‘inflammation’. The Medline search was undertaken for this study by the Cochrane Review Group in Prostate Diseases and Urologic Malignancies. Additional studies were identified by reviewing abstracts of the AUA (1989–99) and International Prostatitis Collaborative Network (IPCN) Meetings (1998–99) and cross-checking bibliographies of retrieved studies, reviews and book chapters. Study information was abstracted independently by the investigators and discrepancies resolved by discussion.

Initial draft

The joint Urology/Pathology Prostatitis Research Group at Queen's University reviewed the histopathology of prostate specimens obtained during the course of the following studies: biopsy study of chronic bacterial/abacterial prostatitis [6]; prostatic inflammatory patterns associated with BPH [7]; a literature review [8]; ongoing pathological review of prostate cancer specimens (biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens); and pathological review of autopsy material from patients with no history of prostatitis, BPH or prostate cancer. From the literature review and this clinical and research experience, the Queen's University prostatitis research team developed a standardized histopathological classification system for chronic prostatitis. The University of Washington in Seattle was independently developing a similar histopathological system for prostatic inflammation. This system was based on a prospective biopsy study of patients with nonbacterial prostatitis and prostatodynia [9]. The Washington group also had similar experience to the Queen's University in patients with BPH and prostate cancer. The Queen's and Washington prostatitis research teams decided to collaborate further on a consensus draft. This draft combined the histological inflammatory pattern scheme of Queen's University and the histological inflammation density scheme of the University of Washington into a single draft document.

Consensus evaluation

The initial draft proposal was distributed to urological centres with a recognized expertise in prostatitis research for a consensus evaluation. Research centres chosen to participate in the consensus process for the validity of the proposal included participants (researchers/centres) of the North American Chronic Prostatitis Collaborative Research Network (CPCRN) and the First IPCN. Twenty urological/pathological clinical centres were asked to reply with comments and constructive criticism. The second draft of the classification system incorporated comments and criticisms of the expert panel of urologists and pathologists from the CPCRN and IPCN. The final draft document describing a consensus classification system for prostatic inflammation was re-circulated to the expert international panel for review. Based on this final review, it was decided that a further draft incorporating more changes was unnecessary.

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

Literature review

Through Medline, 486 potential studies were identified; 51 studies met the inclusion criteria (identified morphological evidence of prostatic inflammation or described patterns of inflammation in the prostate). The remainder used in the development of the histopathological classification system were identified via the alternative search strategies. The patterns of acute and chronic inflammation described in the context of these studies and their potential significance are examined in the discussion. The major finding was the consistent description of the three primary locations of prostatic inflammation, i.e. glandular, peri-glandular and stromal. However, there was no consensus about the quantification of extent or grade of inflammation. There was also no consistent correlation with clinical syndromes or symptoms. These concepts were previously explored in a chapter written by two of the authors [8] and will be expanded in the discussion.

Initial draft

From the research, clinical and pathological experience described above, the Queen's University prostatitis research group developed a system that combined location (glandular, peri-glandular or stromal), grade (mild, moderate or severe, based on inflammatory cell pattern) and extent of involvement of the gland (percentage area/volume). The Washington group independently developed a classification system that was based on the description of the extent of tissue involvement (focal, multifocal, diffuse, instead of area/volume) and grade (inflammatory cell density instead of inflammatory cell pattern). After significant consultation it was evident that the two systems were compatible and could be merged into a single system.

Consensus evaluation

Eighteen (90%) of the research centres associated with the North American CPCRN and the First IPCN participated in the revision of the draft document. The participants included 21 urologists and 18 pathologists (see Appendix). The major classification issues identified by this expert panel consensus review included: inflammatory cell type, measurements of extent of tissue involved (volume/area), location of inflammation within the prostate, objective vs subjective inflammatory grade assessment, association of inflammation with clinical syndromes (BPH, prostate cancer or chronic prostatitis/CPPS), and lack of consensus about the significance, description or grading of granulomatous inflammation.

An attempt was made to address all comments and suggestions noted by two or more centres, while comments made by only one centre were thoroughly discussed. The major revision included deleting granulomatous prostatitis, which will be described separately if and when it occurs. It was decided that there is little known and accepted about the association of clinical syndromes and disease with chronic prostatic inflammation, and that this concept could not be incorporated in the classification system itself. Associations must await further research, using this type of standardized histopathological classification system. The same difficulty was encountered with cell type and the same decision was made.

Histopathological classification system of prostatic inflammation; final draft

The final draft of the classification system was distributed to the expert panel of urologists and pathologists from international centres that replied to the first draft request, and consensus was achieved. The final consensus document describing a histopathological classification system of chronic prostatitis is shown in Table 1. Prostatic inflammation is classified according to its extent and grade/severity in each tissue compartment (location); examples are shown in Fig. 1. The extent, location and severity of granulomatous inflammation will be noted descriptively if it is present at all. Depending on the objective of the particular study, the total volume and differential cell types of the various grades of inflammation can be determined independently. It was the consensus of the expert panel that this classification system can be used in the evaluation of prostatic inflammation in prostate biopsies, TURP chips or prostatectomy specimens.

image

Figure 1. a,. Incidentally identified moderate glandular inflammation in a TURP specimen which showed hyperplasia elsewhere. The patient had symptoms of obstructive voiding but not prostatitis. There are confluent sheets of neutrophils and macrophages within glandular lumina and the secretory epithelium shows partial atrophy. Stained for human prostatic stromal cell secretory protein stain (HPS) × 400. b, Severe periglandular inflammation in a prostatic needle biopsy from a patient with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Confluent sheets of lymphocytes forming a nodule lie in the stroma immediately next to the prostatic glands. Haematoxylin and eosin × 40. c, Moderate periglandular inflammation incidentally noted in a prostatic needle biopsy taken for the diagnosis of cancer. Groups of focally confluent lymphocytes are present in the stroma next to a benign gland distended by a corpora amylacea (on the left side of the image). Adenocarcinoma is seen in the bottom right of the image. HPS, × 40. d, Moderate periglandular inflammation incidentally noted in a radical prostatectomy undertaken for adenocarcinoma. Aggregates of focally confluent lymphocytes lie within stroma next to glands of adenocarcinoma and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. HPS × 100.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

Different medical disciplines have traditionally defined prostatitis using very different criteria. The pathologist has usually given little attention to prostatic inflammation unless it was particularly florid, primarily because the clinical importance of the observation remains largely undefined. For the pathologist, ‘prostatitis’ is defined as ‘more’ (no one has ever discussed how many is ‘more’) inflammatory cells within the prostatic parenchyma [10]. The pathologist based the diagnosis on the cell type that comprised the infiltrate, i.e. neutrophilic, mononuclear (including lymphocytes, plasma cells and macrophages), eosinophilic or granulomatous prostatitis.

In contrast, the urologist defined ‘prostatitis’ as a clinical syndrome characterized by genitourinary discomfort or pain [11]. This clinical syndrome is sometimes, but not invariably, associated with white blood cells and/or bacteria in prostate-specific specimens (expressed prostatic fluid, urine specimens after prostatic massage, or semen). The new National Institute of Health (NIH) classification system for chronic prostatitis/CPPS [3] recognises a further category of chronic prostatitis, that of asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis (Category IV). In this category, prostatic inflammation may be associated with BPH, prostate cancer or infertility, or it may be present in patients with no identifiable prostate disease. The establishment of a standardized histopathological classification system of chronic prostatitis will permit comparison of future studies evaluating, describing or associating prostatic inflammation with other related lower genitourinary conditions.

The association of prostatic inflammation with chronic bacterial prostatitis, inflammatory CPPS (Category IIIA CPPS or chronic nonbacterial prostatitis) or non-inflammatory CPPS (Category IIIB or prostatodynia) has not yet been completely defined. In an early study analysing inflammation and needle-biopsy samples from 24 patients, an acute inflammatory infiltrate was located predominantly within the lumina of prostate glands in six patients while 12 had clusters of predominantly periglandular lymphocytes [12]. In another study, half of 18 patients with chronic nonbacterial prostatitis had no inflammation, three had ‘moderate’ inflammation while no patients had ‘severe’ inflammation [13]. In a study seeking infectious agents in chronic nonbacterial prostatitis using ultrasound-guided biopsy, 88% of 60 patients had a sparse infiltrate of chronic inflammatory cells [14]. In a similar study of patients with chronic bacterial prostatitis, Nickel et al.[6] noted a lack of association of severe prostatic inflammation with positive bacterial cultures. In one of the first studies to systematically characterize inflammation of the prostate in patients who had satisfied strictly defined clinical laboratory criteria for chronic prostatitis/CPPS, True et al.[9] found that the degree of inflammation was minimal to absent in > 95% of cases in which prostate biopsies were examined. This group evaluated prostatic inflammation for location (glandular, periglandular, stromal), extent (focal, multifocal, diffuse) and density of inflammatory cells (inflammatory cells/mm2). They also found no correlation between leukocytes in the expressed prostatic secretion and in the prostate in this population. Further work is needed to define the association between lower genitourinary symptoms, histopathological evidence of chronic inflammation and inflammatory infiltrates in prostate-specific specimens (expressed prostatic secretions, and urine and semen after prostatic massage).

Histological evidence of prostatic inflammation is almost universally found in association with BPH [15]. Kohnen and Drach [16] found inflammatory infiltrates in 98% of prostates that were resected for BPH. The location of inflammation, which did not correlate significantly with presence or absence of a ‘significant infection’, was described as glandular, periglandular and/or stromal. Others [17] have confirmed the histological association of prostatic inflammation and BPH, while others [18,19] have characterized some of the specific inflammatory cells associated with BPH. Anim et al.[20] attempted to locate the different types of inflammatory cells in prostatic lesions associated with BPH to determine the sequence of events in the cellular reaction. This study suggested that macrophages respond first to local injury or stimuli (at the prostatic glandular epithelial level), followed by recruitment of T lymphocytes which participate in the inflammatory response and accumulate around the damaged glands. B cell activity appears to be a late event. Irani et al.[21] analysed the influence of prostatic inflammation on serum PSA concentrations in patients with exclusively BPH tissue on prostate biopsies. Inflammatory infiltration was graded as 0 (no inflammatory cells), 1 (scattered inflammatory cell infiltrate within the stroma with no lymphoid nodules), 2 (non-confluent lymphoid nodules) and 3 (large inflammatory areas with confluence of infiltrate). Inflammatory aggressiveness was graded as 0–3 by the degree of contact between the inflammatory cells and glandular epithelium. Grading did not include the types of inflammatory cells. Nickel et al.[7] examined histological sections from prospectively collected TURP specimens from 80 patients with a diagnosis of BPH but no history or symptoms of prostatitis, using an immunostain for leukocyte-common antigen and scanned using a computerized image analysis system. Inflammation was identified in all cases, but the tissue surface areas involved averaged only 1.1% of the total specimen, with periglandular inflammation being the predominant pattern (0.5%). Foci of inflammation were categorized as glandular, periglandular or stromal, and inflammatory cell density graded from 0 to 3 using a scheme similar to that of Irani et al.[21]. There was no significant difference between any combination of inflammation pattern, volume or grade of inflammation in catheterized vs uncatheterized patients, or culture-positive vs culture-negative cases. Neither total PSA nor PSA density showed a significant correlation with the extent, grade or location of inflammation. Atan et al.[22] found no statistical correlations between irritative symptom score and the degree morphological evidence of prostatic inflammation in patients undergoing surgery for BPH. Anjum et al.[23] found that there was a higher incidence of a glandular pattern of inflammation in patients with BPH who presented in acute urinary retention than a stromal pattern in a control group of patients with BPH undergoing TURP.

Several studies examined the association of prostatic inflammation and prostate cancer [24–26], but there was no clear relationship between these pathological entities. However, Irani et al.[27] recently noted that patients with high-grade inflammation surrounding malignant glands in radical prostatectomy specimens had significantly more postoperative biochemical recurrence than patients with low-grade inflammation. However, prostatic inflammation can sometimes confound the detection of prostate cancer through its potential effects on PSA levels. Prostatitis, and more specifically bacterial prostatitis, was first shown to influence PSA levels shortly after assay kits were released for general use [28]. Adequate treatment with appropriate antibiotics for acute prostatitis usually results in subsequent normalization of serum PSA levels. A clinical investigation revealed an elevated PSA level in 71% of patients with acute prostatitis, 15% of patients with chronic prostatitis and 6% with nonbacterial prostatitis, but in none with prostatodynia [29]. In patients with bacterial prostatitis, the serum PSA level decreased to normal after antimicrobial therapy in most cases in the series. In 700 men who underwent prostatic needle biopsy for an elevated PSA or an abnormal DRE, 27% had histological evidence of prostatitis [30]. Most (94%) had chronic inflammation, 6% had acute inflammation and 0.2% had granulomatous changes. In another study, serum PSA values significantly correlated with the extent of histologically confirmed acute and chronic active prostatitis, whereas there was no correlation between PSA and chronic inactive prostatitis [31]. In that study acute prostatitis was defined as neutrophilic infiltrate in the glands, whereas chronic inactive prostatitis indicated only chronic inflammatory infiltrate in the glands and stroma. Nadler et al.[32] compared the effects of histological evidence of prostatic inflammation in a larger screening population of men with elevated PSA concentrations to men with normal serum PSA concentrations who were biopsied because of a suspicious DRE. They reported that prostatic inflammation may be an important factor contributing to PSA elevation in men with no prostate cancer. Inflammation in prostatic tissue was characterized as acute (polymorphonuclear leukocytes within glandular or ductal lumina, their epithelium and/or adjacent stroma) and chronic (mononuclear cell infiltrate in the stoma around prostatic glands) prostatitis. They further graded inflammation on a 3-point scale of 0 (none), 1 (low grade) and 2 (high grade).

Men with infertility frequently (up to 22%) have evidence of an inflammatory process of the reproductive tract (usually detected by the high concentrations of leukocytes in the semen), yet bacterial cultures fail to reveal any pathological organisms [33]. Several studies have shown that men with clinical prostatitis appear to have altered semen values, with more leukocytes in the semen, decreased sperm motility and a decrease in the percentage of sperm with abnormal forms; this may be reversed with antibiotic therapy [33–39]. Biochemical data indicate that the prostate is the main target in clinically ‘silent’ male genital tract inflammation in the infertile male population [40]. However, there are no published studies that correlate inflammatory cells in semen with tissue inflammation.

NIH Category IV (asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis) is defined as the presence of demonstrable prostatic inflammation in prostate-specific specimens, including biopsies. Inflammation in autopsy series, which includes men with and without specific prostate disease, is reported to be 5–15.3% in patients over 60 years of age [41]. McNeal [42] found inflammation in 40 of 90 (44%) sampled adult prostates obtained at autopsy. Evidence of prostatic inflammation was noted in 45% of aspiration biopsy specimens taken because of suspected carcinoma [43]. Blumenfeld et al.[44] noted a significant incidence of incidental lymphocytic prostatitis (usually stromal) in benign prostate glands. The relevance of prostatic inflammation in asymptomatic men, particularly those with no evidence of BPH or prostate cancer, is unknown.

A consistent description of several fairly distinct, although often coexisting, patterns of chronic inflammation has emerged from the present review of the literature. The most common pattern of inflammation is a lymphocytic infiltrate in the stroma immediately next to the prostatic acini, with a less prominent intraepithelial component [7,9,16]. This periglandular inflammation is typically patchy and although all anatomical regions of the prostate can be involved, there appears to be a predilection for the peripheral zone [45,46]. The intensity of the inflammatory process varies considerably, from only scattered lymphocytes to dense lymphoid nodules or secondary follicles with germinal centres. In cases in which there are many periglandular inflammatory cells, the degree of epithelial infiltration is typically also greater and effects on the epithelial cells are more prominent (although the basal cell appears more resistant to inflammatory damage) [47]. Increased proliferation can be shown in an inflamed glandular epithelium by radiolabelled thymidine uptake and immunohistochemical staining with proliferation markers such as Ki-67 [48]. The inflammatory infiltrates of the periglandular area usually consist of a mixed population of B and T lymphocytes, with greater overall numbers of T-cells [47,49,50]. Significant numbers of macrophage are also typically present both in glands and in the periglandular stroma, but plasma cells are less common.

Stromal lymphocytic infiltrates frequently coexist with periglandular inflammation. Sheets, clusters and occasional nodules of lymphocytes and scattered plasma cells are seen within the fibromuscular stroma, with no apparent relationship to glands. The tissue response to the infiltrates is usually minimal and significant stromal fibrosis is virtually always absent [7,16].

Infiltrates of inflammatory cells restricted to the glandular epithelium and lumen are found in association with BPH, prostatitis and as an isolated finding in asymptomatic patients [7,9,16]. The intraepithelial inflammatory cells may be lymphocytes, neutrophils and macrophages, while neutrophils and macrophages are typically found in the lumen. Most commonly, these patients show focal mild acute (i.e. neutrophil-rich) glandular inflammation combined with chronic periglandular and stromal inflammatory infiltrates [7,9,16].

Several other histological findings are not incorporated in the present consensus classification system. Corpora amylacea, which are commonly present within prostate glands and ducts, are not usually associated with prostatic inflammation. They may become large enough to distend a duct or gland, resulting in the attenuation of the adjacent epithelium, causing periglandular inflammation [45]. Calculi usually occur in the central prostatic ducts and are not usually associated with inflammation. These prostatic calculi may sometimes contribute to prostatic inflammation by providing a nidus in which infectious organisms may escape host defences, and by preventing drainage through obstruction of the central ducts [51,52]. Peri-urethritis can also accompany chronic prostatic inflammation and is characterized by mixed populations of inflammatory cells, including lymphocytes, plasma cells and neutrophils, and is often associated with prominent oedema [7]. Interpretation of the significance of these latter observations is difficult and by consensus it was decided not to incorporate these entities into the classification system.

The expert panel was not able to reach a consensus on the classification of granulomatous inflammation. The histological pattern of nonspecific granulomatous prostatitis is variable. It is typified by heavy lobular, mixed, inflammatory infiltrates which include abundant histiocytes, lymphocytes and plasma cells. The inflamed areas are often punctuated by disrupted prostatic ducts. Although occasional small, discreet granulomas may be present, most of the infiltrate is usually not organized into well-defined granulomas. There may be scattered small foci of necrosis and neutrophils, and even eosinophils can be prominent [53–57]. Granulomatous prostatic inflammation is a common complication of local prostate surgery [58,59], BCG therapy [60–62], recent UTI [63] or a rare event in a setting of systemic tuberculosis [64,65]. Granulomatous prostatitis can also, rarely, result from cryptococci, sarcoid, malacoplakia, and from an allergic vasculitis [66,67]. However, many cases of granulomatous prostatitis are idiopathic. By consensus, it was decided in this classification system to descriptively note the extent, location and severity of granulomatous inflammation.

The present histopathological classification system of chronic prostatitis is far from perfect. It is based on critical research published previously, particularly that of Kohnen and Drach [16], describing inflammatory patterns from prostate specimens in patients with BPH. The classification draws on the clinical and research experience of two prostatitis research centres that were independently developing classification systems of their own (Queen's University and University of Washington), and benefits from the consensus input of a panel of recognized experts (participants of the North American CPCRN and the IPCN). The system also, to some extent, suffers from these same associations; as with any classification system, a balance is required between simplicity (to allow for ease of use) and completeness. A document that was drafted according to such a wide consensus is bound to draw criticism from those who are more interested in one specific aspect of such a system. We have also failed to reach a consensus on the frequency, importance and classification of granulomatous inflammation, but by consensual agreement, this omission has been dealt with descriptively. Finally, this system will not be the final model on the histopathology of chronic inflammation of the prostate gland. As more research is undertaken, further evidence may require changes and/or modifications in the proposed system. However, there is no doubt that this proposed histopathological classification system of chronic prostatitis is an improvement over the status quo, i.e. no accepted classification system at all.

In conclusion, prostatic inflammation is a common histopathological observation; its association with chronic prostatitis/CPPS has not yet been completely defined. Even less is known about asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis associated with BPH, prostate cancer and infertility. Inflammatory patterns seen in normal, asymptomatic prostate-specific disease-free men has not been adequately studied. There was a general consensus of urologists and pathologists with expertise and interest in prostatitis that a standardized accepted framework to describe histopathological prostatic inflammation will prove useful in evaluating these prostatic diseases.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix
  • 1
    McNaughton-Collins M, Stafford R, O'Leary M et al. How common is prostatitis? A national survey of physician visits. J Urol 1998; 159: 12248
  • 2
    Roberts R, Lieber M, Bostwick D et al. A review of clinical and pathological prostatitis syndromes. Urology 1997; 49: 80921
  • 3
    Kreiger JN, Nyberg L, Nickel JC. NIH consensus definition and classification of prostatitis. JAMA 1999; 282: 2367
  • 4
    Litwin SM, MacNaughton-Collins M, Fowler FJ et al. The National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI): Development and validation of a new outcome measure. J Urol 1999; 162: 36975
  • 5
    Nickel JC, Nyber L, Hennennfent M. A consensus report from the first National Institutes of Health International Prostatitis Collaborative Network (NIH-IPCN). Urology 1999; 54: 22933DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00205-8
  • 6
    Nickel JC & Costerton JW. Bacterial localization in antibiotic-refractory chronic bacterial prostatitis. Prostate 1993; 23: 10714
  • 7
    Nickel JC, Downey J, Young I, Boag A. Asymptomatic inflammation and/or infection in benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int 1999; 84: 97681DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00352.x
  • 8
    Boag AH & Young ID. Pathology of acute and chronic prostate inflammation. In NickelJC ed. Textbook of Prostatitis. Oxford: ISIS Medical Media Ltd, 1999: 5768
  • 9
    True LD, Berger RE, Rothman I, Ross SO, Kreiger JN. Prostate histopathology in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome, a prospective biopsy study. J Urol 1999; 162: 20148
  • 10
    Cotran RS, Kumar V, Robbins SL., Robbins SL ed. Robbins' Pathologic Basis of Disease. 6th edn, Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1999: 10257
  • 11
    Nickel JC. Prostatitis: evolving management strategies. Urol Clin North Am 1999; 26: 74351
  • 12
    Schmidt JD & Patterson MC. Needle biopsy study of chronic prostatitis. J Urol 1966; 96: 51933
  • 13
    Nielsen ML, Asnaes S, Hatal T. Inflammatory changes in the non-infected prostate gland. A clinical, microbiological and histological investigation. J Urol 1973; 110: 4236
  • 14
    Doble A, Thomas BJ, Furr PM et al. A search for infectious agents in chronic abacterial prostatitis using ultrasound guided biopsy. Br J Urol 1989; 64: 297301
  • 15
    Nickel JC. Prostatic inflammation in benign prostatic hyperplasia – the third component? Can J Urol 1994; 1: 14
  • 16
    Kohnen PW & Drach GW. Patterns of inflammation and prostatic hyperplasia: a histologic and bacteriologic study. J Urol 1979; 121: 75560
  • 17
    Odunjo EO & Elabut A. Chronic prostatitis in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Br J Urol 1971; 43: 3337
  • 18
    Theyer G, Kramer G, Assmann I et al. Phenotypic characterization of infiltrating leukocytes in BPH. Lab Invest 1999; 66: 96107
  • 19
    Steiner G, Gessl A, Dramer G, Scholhammer A, Forster O, Marberger M. Phenotype and function of peripheral prostatic lymphocytes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). J Urol 1994; 151: 4804
  • 20
    Anim JT, Udo D, John B. Characterization of inflammatory cells in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Acta Histochemica 1998; 100: 43949
  • 21
    Irani J, Levillain P, Goujon J-M et al. Inflammation in benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with prostate specific antigen value. J Urol 1997; 157: 13013
  • 22
    Atan A, Horn T, Hansen F et al. Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Does a correlation exist between prostatic morphology and irritative symptoms? Scan J Urol Nephrol 1996; 30: 3036
  • 23
    Anjum I, Ahmed M, Azzopardi A, Marfti GR. Prostatic infarction/infection in acute urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 1998; 160: 7923
  • 24
    McClinton S, Miller ID, Eremin O. Immunohistochemical characterization of the inflammatory cell infiltrate in benign and malignant prostate disease. Br J Cancer 1990; 61: 4003
  • 25
    Presti B & Veidner N. Granulomatous prostatitis and poorly differentiated prostate carcinoma: their distinction with the use of immunohistochemical methods. Am J Clin Pathol 1991; 95: 3304
  • 26
    Zhang W, Sesterhenn IA, Connelly RR, Mostofi FK, Moul JW. Inflammatory infiltrate (prostatitis) in whole mounted radical prostatectomy specimens from black and white patients is not etiology for racial differences in prostate specific antigen. J Urol 2000; 163: 1316
  • 27
    Irani J, Goujon JM, Ragni E et al. High-grade inflammation in prostate cancer as a prognostic factor for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Pathologist Multi Center Study Group. Urology 1999; 54: 46772DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00152-1
  • 28
    Dalton DL. Elevated serum PSA due to acute bacterial prostatitis. Urology 1989; 33: 465
  • 29
    Pansadoro V, Emiliozzi P, Defidio L et al. Prostate specific antigen and prostatitis in men under 50. Eur Urol 1996; 30: 247
  • 30
    Socher S, O'Leary MP, Richie JP et al. Prevalence of prostatitis in men undergoing biopsy for elevated PSA or abnormal digital rectal exam. J Urol 1996; 155 (Suppl.): 425A
  • 31
    Hasui Y, Marutsuka K, Asada Y et al. Relationship between serum prostate specific antigen and histological prostatitis in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate 1994; 25: 916
  • 32
    Nadler RB, Humphrey PA, Smith DS et al. Effect of inflammation and benign prostatic hyperplasia on elevated serum prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol 1995; 154: 40713
  • 33
    Jarvi K & Mittleman M. Prostatitis and infertility. In NickelJC ed. Textbook of Prostatitis. Oxford: ISIS Medical Media Ltd, 1999: 23340
  • 34
    Leib Z, Bartov B, Eltes F, Servadio C. Reduced semen quality caused by chronic abacterial prostatitis: an enigma or reality? Fertil Steril 1994; 66: 110916
  • 35
    Christiansen E, Tollefsrud A, Purvis K. Sperm quality in men with chronic abacterial prostatovesiculitis verified by rectal ultrasonography. Urology 1991; 38: 5459
  • 36
    Weidner W, Jantos C, Scheiffer HG et al. Semen parameters in men with and without proven chronic prostatitis. Arch Androl 1991; 26: 1738
  • 37
    Giamarellou H, Tympanidis K, Bitos NA et al. Infertility in chronic prostatitis. Andrology 1984; 16: 41722
  • 38
    Nikkanen V, Gronroos M, Suominen J, Multamaki S. Silent infection in male accessory genital organs in male infertility. Andrology 1979; 11: 23641
  • 39
    Malallah YA & Zissis NP. Effective minocycline on the sperm count and activity in infertile men with high pus cell count in their seminal fluid. J Chemotherapy 1992; 4: 2869
  • 40
    Wolff H, Bezold G, Zebhauser M, Meurer M. Impact of clinically silent inflammation on male genital tract organs as reflected by biochemical markers in semen. J Androl 1991; 12: 3314
  • 41
    Moore RA. Inflammation of the prostate gland. J Urol 1937; 38: 17382
  • 42
    McNeal JE. Regional morphology and pathology of the prostate. Am J Clin Path 1968; 49: 34757
  • 43
    Maksem JA, Johenning PW, Galang CF. Prostatitis and aspiration biopsy cytology of prostate. Urology 1988; 32: 2638
  • 44
    Blumenfeld W, Tucci S, Narayan P. Incidental lymphocytic prostatitis: selective involvement with nonmalignant glands. Am J Surg Path 1992; 16: 97581
  • 45
    Attah E. Non-specific inflammatory lesions of the prostate: spectrum and patterns. Int Surg 1975; 60: 15862
  • 46
    McNeal JE. Prostate. In SternbergSS ed. Histology for Pathologists, 2nd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997: 9971018
  • 47
    Helpap B. Histologic and immunohistochemical study of chronic prostatic inflammation with and without benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol Pathol 1994; 2: 4964
  • 48
    Stiens R, Helpap B, Bruhl P. Proliferation of prostatic epithelium in chronic prostatitis. Urol Res 1975; 3: 213
  • 49
    McClinton S, Eremin O, Miller ID. Inflammatory infiltrate in prostatic hyperplasia – evidence of a host response to intraprostatic spermatozoa? Br J Urol 1990; 65: 60610
  • 50
    McClinton S, Miller ID, Eremin O. An immunohistochemical characterization of the inflammatory cell infiltrate in benign and malignant prostatic disease. Br J Cancer 1990; 61: 4003
  • 51
    Roberts RO, Lieber M, Bostwick DG, Jacobsen SJ. A review of clinical pathological prostatitis syndromes. Urology 1997; 49: 80921
  • 52
    Meares EM Jr. . Infection stones of prostate gland: laboratory diagnosis and clinical management. Urology 1974; 4: 5606
  • 53
    Oppenheimer JR, Kahne H, Epstein JI. Granulomatous prostatitis on needle biopsy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121: 7249
  • 54
    Schmidt JD. Non-specific granulomatous prostatitis: classification review and report of cases. J Urol 1965; 94: 60715
  • 55
    O'Dea MJ, Hunting DB, Greene LF. Non-specific granulomatous prostatitis. J Urol 1977; 118: 5860
  • 56
    Bryan RL, Newman J, Campbell A et al. Granulomatous prostatitis: a clinical pathologic study. Histopathology 1991; 19: 4537
  • 57
    Stillwell TJ, Engan DE, Farrow GM. The clinical spectrum of granulomous prostatitis: a report of 200 cases. J Urol 1987; 138: 3203
  • 58
    Mies C, Balogh K, Stadecker M. Pallisading prostate granulomas following surgery. Am J Surg Pathol 1984; 8: 21721
  • 59
    Eyre RC, Aaronson AG, Weinstein BJ. Pallisading granulomas of the prostate associated with prior prostatic surgery. J Urol 1986; 136: 1212
  • 60
    Oates RD, Stilmant MM, Freedlun MC, Siroky MB. Granulomous prostatitis following bacillus Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy of bladder cancer. J Urol 1988; 140: 7514
  • 61
    Lafontaine PD, Mittleman BR, Graham SD Jr, Sanders WH. Incidence of granulomous prostatitis and acid-fast bacilli after intravesicular BCG therapy. Urology 1997; 49: 3636DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(96)00507-9
  • 62
    Mi Y, Ashit H, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ. BCG-induced granulomous prostatitis: a comparative ultrasound and pathologic study. Urology 1992; 39: 3647
  • 63
    Stillwell TJ, Engen DE, Farrow GM. The clinical spectrum of granulomatous prostatitis: a report of 200 cases. J Urol 1987; 138: 3203
  • 64
    Moore RA. Tuberculosis of the prostate gland. J Urol 1937; 37: 37284
  • 65
    Gorse GJ & Belshe RB. Male genital tuberculosis: a review of the literature with instructive case reports. Rev Infect Dis 1985; 7: 51124
  • 66
    Epstein JI & Hutchins GM. Granulomatous prostatitis: distinction among allergic, nonspecific, and post-transurethral resection lesions. Hum Pathol 1984; 15: 81825
  • 67
    Milchgrub S, Visconti I, Avellini J. Granulomatous prostatitis induced by capsule-deficient cryptococcal infection. J Urol 1990; 141: 3656

Appendix

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. References
  8. Appendix

Participating urologists and pathologists of the CPCRN and the IPCN.

J.C. Nickel, A. Boag, I. Young; Kingston, Canada

J. Krieger, R.E. Berger, L.D. True; Seattle, USA

A. Schaeffer, R.B. Nadler, M.R. Pins, Chicago, USA

W.W. Hochreiter; Switzerland

S. Kaplan, A.E. Te, K. O'Toole; New York City, USA

M. Pontari; Philadelphia, USA

T. Moon, R. Hafez; Madison, USA

A. Doble, R. Mosley, M. Walker; Cambridge/London, UK

B.L. Gushchin, Y.V. Kudryavtsev; Moscow, Russia

R.B. Alexander, A. Borkowski; Baltimore, USA

M.P. O'Leary, T. Kroll; Boston, USA

W. Weidner; Germany

K.G. Naber, M. Rotter; Straubing, Germany

A.E. Feliciano Jr, M. Cruz, B. Garcia Jr; Manila, Philippines

D. Shoskes; Los Angeles, USA

K. Jarvi, W. Harwick; Toronto, Canada

T.E. Bjerklund Johansen, C. Busch; Parsgrunn, Norway

J.M. Potts; Cleveland, USA

Table 1.  The proposed classification of prostatic inflammatory infiltrates. For each case, the prostatic inflammatory infiltrates in each specific location (glandular, periglandular and stromal) are categorized by the extent of inflammation (focal, multifocal or diffuse) and the grade of inflammation (1/mild, 2/moderate, 3/severe). If more than one grade of inflammation is present for a given anatomical location, the dominant grade and the most severe grade should be specified, e.g. multifocal mild glandular inflammation, focal mild periglandular inflammation, diffuse mild stromal inflammation and focal severe stromal inflammation
FeatureDetails
Anatomical locationHistological pattern
glandularinflammatory infiltrates lie within duct/gland epithelium and/or lumens
periglandularinflammatory infiltrates lie within stroma, are centred around ducts/glands, and approach ducts/glands to within 50 µm
stromalinflammatory cells lie within prostatic stroma but not centred on prostatic glands/ducts and lie ≥ 50 µm from them
ExtentTissue area involved by inflammatory cell infiltrates
focal < 10%
multifocal10–50%
diffuse > 50%
GradeMorphological description (typical inflammatory cell density, cells/mm2)
1/mildindividual inflammatory cells, most of which are separated by distinct intervening spaces (< 100)
2/moderateconfluent sheets of inflammatory cells with no tissue destruction or lymphoid nodule/follicle formation (100–500)
3/severeconfluent sheets of inflammatory cells with tissue destruction or nodule/follicle formation (> 500)