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 ) .
Ejaculatory Disorders Caused by Alpha-1 Blockers for Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Suggestive of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Comparison of Naftopidil and Tamsulosin in a Randomized Multicenter Study
Introduction : To investigate the incidence of ejaculatory disorders caused by naftopidil and tamsulosin in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms ( LUTS ) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia ( BPH ) . Material s and Methods : Ninety-five patients with LUTS/BPH who had International Prostate Symptom Scores ( IPSS ) of 8 or more were r and omly assigned to receive naftopidil ( 50 mg/day , n = 48 ) or tamsulosin ( 0.2 mg/day , n = 47 ) . Before and 12 weeks after treatment , a question naire was used to evaluate ejaculation . Results : Among men who had sexual activity during the 12 weeks , the proportion who reported an abnormal feeling on ejaculation was higher in the tamsulosin group ( 16.7 % ) than in the naftopidil group ( 7.4 % ) , although the difference was not significant ( p = 0.402 ) . The proportion of men who reported reduced ejaculatory volume after treatment was significantly higher in the tamsulosin group ( 96.0 % ) than in the naftopidil group ( 73.1 % , p = 0.0496 ) . On the other h and , the improvements in IPSS and the quality of life index were significantly higher in the tamsulosin group than in the naftopidil group . Conclusions : Tamsulosin may cause a higher incidence of ejaculatory disorders than naftopidil , although the efficacy of 0.2 mg tamsulosin may be better than that of 50 mg naftopidil
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 ) .