Although additional well design ed , worldwide , placebo-controlled and r and omized studies are necessary to confirm the long-term outcomes of naftopidil pharmacotherapy , current data suggest that naftopidil administration in BPH patients provides comparable improvements in total IPSS , QoL , and urinary symptoms from baseline relative to 0.2 mg/d tamsulosin and 8 mg/d silodosin .
However , improvements in Qmax are generally less with naftopidil than with tamsulosin .
Reported adverse effects related to naftopidil administration are negligible and usually mild .
OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to systematic ally review the effects of the adrenoreceptor A1D antagonist naftopidil in the management of  lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) .
Silodosin versus naftopidil for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a multicenter randomized trial.
This was a multicenter r and omized trial to investigate the clinical efficacy and the impact on sexual function of alpha-1A selective silodosin and alpha-1D selective naftopidil for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia . A total of 97 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia who had an International Prostate Symptom Score of 8 or more were r and omly assigned to receive silodosin ( 8 mg/day , n = 53 ) or naftopidil ( 75 mg/day , n = 44 ) . Before and 4 , 8 and 12 weeks after treatment , International Prostate Symptom Score and its quality of life score were used to assess lower urinary tract symptoms . Also , International Index of Erectile Function-5 , and an original question naire were used to evaluate erectile function and ejaculation for sexually active patients , respectively . The silodosin group showed advantages in terms of voiding symptoms and quality of life of International Prostate Symptom Score when compared with the naftopidil group . Both silodosin and naftopidil showed no significant effect on International Index of Erectile Function-5 . A total of 23 sexually active patients in the silodosin group experienced more ejaculatory impairment than 21 patients in the naftopidil group , with a decrease of ejaculation volume ( 87 % vs 40 % , P = 0.003 ) , prolonged time to ejaculation ( 56 % vs 33 % , P = 0.027 ) and decrease of orgasm ( 50 % vs 39 % , P = 0.027 ) . These results suggest that alpha-1A selective blockers are more effective for voiding symptoms , whereas alpha-1D selective blockers offer a minor degree of ejaculatory dysfunction
Although additional well design ed , worldwide , placebo-controlled and r and omized studies are necessary to confirm the long-term outcomes of naftopidil pharmacotherapy , current data suggest that naftopidil administration in BPH patients provides comparable improvements in total IPSS , QoL , and urinary symptoms from baseline relative to 0.2 mg/d tamsulosin and 8 mg/d silodosin .
However , improvements in Qmax are generally less with naftopidil than with tamsulosin .
Reported adverse effects related to naftopidil administration are negligible and usually mild .
OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to systematic ally review the effects of the adrenoreceptor A1D antagonist naftopidil in the management of  lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) .