Smoking habits and benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Previous studies have warned against the promoting effects of cigarette smoking on benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In contrast, some have argued that smoking confers a protective effect regarding BPH, while others have observed an aggravated effect. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to deter...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inMedicine (Baltimore) Vol. 95; no. 32; p. e4565
Main Authors Xu, Huan, Fu, Shi, Chen, Yanbo, Chen, Qi, Gu, Meng, Wang, Zhong
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved 01.08.2016
Wolters Kluwer Health
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Previous studies have warned against the promoting effects of cigarette smoking on benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In contrast, some have argued that smoking confers a protective effect regarding BPH, while others have observed an aggravated effect. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to determine whether cigarette use is associated with BPH risk.To identify articles from observational studies of relevance, a search was performed concurrent to March 21, 2016, on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, EBSCO, and EMBASE databases. Random-effect model, according to the heterogeneity, was calculated to reveal the relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Eight articles were included in this meta-analysis, representing data for 44,100 subjects, of which 5221 (11.8%) had BPH as defined according to the criteria. Seven reports are concerned with analysis between nonsmokers and ex-smokers, in which no significant difference was observed (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.05). Another meta-analysis of 7 studies indicated an observable trend, but without significant difference between groups of nonsmokers and current smokers (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.98-1.41). Between groups of heavy (6 articles; RR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.84-1.24) and light smokers (5 articles; RR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.71-1.15), again no significant difference appears. Finally, we combined individuals as never-smokers and ever-smokers and still found no significant difference between the 2 groups of patients (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92-1.15). Sensitivity analysis was displayed and confirmed the stability of the present results.Combined evidence from observational studies shows no significant association between cigarette smoking and BPH risk, either for ex-smokers or for current smokers. The trend of elevated BPH risk from smoking was observed only in current smokers compared with nonsmokers, while marginal significance was observed in comparing ever-smokers with never-smokers in operative patients with BPH.
Bibliography:SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ObjectType-Article-3
ObjectType-Undefined-4
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000004565