Evaluation and pelvic floor management of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes

Published on 22/05/2015 by admin

Filed under Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 0 (0 votes)

This article have been viewed 2797 times

12 Evaluation and pelvic floor management of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes

Introduction

Urologic disorders and pelvic pain present an obvious relationship. A large proportion of the human population has endured pain or discomfort of a simple urinary tract infection. And one of the earliest adventures in human surgical intervention arose in the centuries BC as the Greeks ‘cut for stone’ to relieve the obstruction and pain of urinary bladder calculi. However, now that most of the urogynaecologic organ maladies of infection, neoplasia and obstruction are understood, we are still left with a noisome bag of discomforts lacking any clear pathogenesis. These are the urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes (UCPPS). The majority of these conditions arise from either a possible urinary bladder source known as bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC) or prostate source known as prostate pain syndrome (PPS), named chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) in the United States. The European Association of Urology attempted to update and provide a classification of pelvic pain disorders to suggest avenues for further management (Fall et al. 2010). Their pelvic pain descriptions fit into neat little boxes of urological, gynaecological, anorectal, neuromuscular and ‘other’ categories. These non-malignant pain conditions or syndromes perceived in structures related to the pelvis of both males and females do not deserve more specific diagnoses because the aetiology and pathogenesis remains a mystery – ‘a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma’ – and we depend on a complex symptomatic analysis to help guide us in evaluation and therapy. Regrettably the final common pathway often defaults as a referral to a pain management team. While awaiting elucidation of the cellular and molecular pathogenic mechanisms of UCPPS, we should rely on a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm to direct logical evaluation and multimodal management. We must develop alternative ways of thinking about managing these urologic pain conditions. UCPPS needs to be viewed as much more than an organ-specific disease, but rather as a biopsychosocial disorder. The central problem is pain. Traditional biomedical treatment for UCPPS has failed (Anderson 2006). Antibiotics, α-blocking agents and anti-inflammatory agents as well as virtually all other pharmaceuticals have shown unimpressive outcomes in ameliorating the effects of these disorders. The biopsychosocial model of this condition rather than the biomedical model holds the key to understanding the pathogenesis and possible future treatments. Phenotyping is one current trend and we recommend it for approaching patients with these disorders allowing specific guideline development for multimodal therapy (Baranowski et al. 2008, Nickel et al. 2009, Shoskes et al. 2009). Some of the recent developments and approaches arose from clinical investigation and treatment protocols supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the United States over the past 10 years. A descriptive phenotyping classification allows understanding of epidemiology, aetiology and potential design of randomized clinical trials. Clinically identifiable domains suggested include: urinary, psychosocial, organ specific, infection, neurological/systemic and muscle tenderness (Nickel & Shoskes 2009, Shoskes et al. 2009) (Table 12.1).

Table 12.1 Percentage of patients with specific myofascial trigger point tenderness

Muscle groups % Patients with trigger point tenderness, N = 72
Internal muscles
Puborectalis/pubococcygeus 90.3
Coccygeus 34.7
Sphincter ani 16.6
External muscles
Rectus abdominis 55.6
External oblique 52.8
Adductors 19.4
Gluteus medius 18.1
Gluteus maximus 6.9
Bulbospongiosus 12.5
Transverse perineal 11.1

The early chapters of this book present a diverse range of symptoms and describe multiple aetiological possibilities for chronic pelvic pain (CPP). The aim of this chapter is to review evidence regarding urologic conditions associated with pelvic pain, provide a description of good urologic evaluation, and focus on one specific management approach involving manipulation of the pelvic floor neuromuscular tissue using both physiotherapeutic and psychological maneuvers (the Wise-Anderson Stanford Protocol).

Urologic diagnostic evaluation

Prostate pain syndrome

Chronic prostatitis is an incorrect label; we are dealing with a variable set of pain conditions with no objective markers and multivariate symptoms. The disorder is not prostatocentric symptomatology and pain sites exist between the umbilicus to above the mid thigh. The European Community has promoted the term prostate pain syndrome (PPS) as a more generic term over the NIH category III chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). Still, it smacks of a prostatocentric approach, which is probably to be avoided for lack of evidence, and it encourages the use of antibiotics as standard therapy that clearly lacks efficacy. By definition, PPS is persistent discomfort or pain in the pelvic region with sterile specimen cultures and either significant or insignificant white blood cell counts in prostate specimens: semen, expressed prostatic secretion or urine collected after prostate massage. There does not appear to be any diagnostic or therapeutic advantage to differentiating between those patients with significant or insignificant leucocytes from the prostate (Schaeffer et al. 2002); however, in the author’s experience, men with no prostate inflammation appear to suffer greater degrees and longer duration of pelvic pain on average.

Medical history

The typical patient is a young to middle-age man with variable symptoms of chronic, irritative and obstructive voiding accompanied by moderate to severe pain in the pelvis, low back, perineum and genitalia. To qualify as CPP the condition should occur for longer than 6 months and, for research purposes, continuous within the previous 3 months. The healthcare burden of PPS is exemplified by approximately two million physician office visits per year in the United States. It is one of the most common genitourinary diagnoses in men under the age of 50 years. The urologist’s first order of business when referred such a patient is to accept the challenge seriously and treat the man suffering with this condition with respect, interest and compassion. The patient is understandably tense, wary and defensive, having encountered frustration and rejection previously. The physician should listen to the patient’s complaints and accurately document the circumstances surrounding the onset of the disorder – sensory descriptions, various treatment modalities and outcomes, noting particularly the time course of events and associated triggers that may have caused a flare in his symptoms. The US national cohort study by the NIH reported a typical duration of patient complaints averaging 4 years.

The urologist evaluating pelvic pain in a male must rule out associated urinary bladder or prostate diseases. Errors in diagnosis and inappropriate therapeutic pathways may ensue if less than a systematic evaluation is undertaken. Both prostate and bladder cancer as well as urinary calculus disease have been missed because of an inappropriate diagnosis of ‘chronic prostatitis’. It is crucial to have empathy for the suffering patient, documenting his description of the physical characteristics of the pain complex: what makes it worse, what helps, where is the pain referred, and what associations exist with sexual function? The psychosexual behaviour and influence of sexual partner relationships play a significant role. How has the chronic pain affected libido, the ability to attain adequate penile erections, accomplish intercourse, reach orgasm and have pleasurable ejaculation? Associated alimentary tract complaints such as irritable bowel disorder, constipation, dietary exacerbations and bowel function may point to further clarifying aspects of the disorder. Further, the psychosocial medical history should probe for genetic or acquired personality types: tense, anxious, chronic tension-holding patterns, possible childhood issues of sexual or physical abuse, traumatic toilet training, abnormal bowel patterns, teen sexual problems, excessive masturbation, suppressed homosexuality, excessive weight lifting, gymnastic manoeuvres and activities such as dance training. Identifying such issues helps to create a specific phenotype of the pain condition and may ultimately suggest appropriate multimodal therapy.

We utilize symptom questionnaires and validated instruments to detail patient psychological issues. These tools help quantify the baseline, eventual progress and outcome of our management techniques. The most widely used research tool is the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). An alternative type of CPPS symptom questionnaire – the Pelvic Pain Symptom Score (PPSS) – has also been useful in our hands. The PPSS expands the description of named painful anatomical locations and grades the severity of pain (0 to 4+); it includes urinary symptoms that mimic the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and scores sexual dysfunction aspects of the patient condition as a separate domain. Our group utilized this questionnaire in the treatment outcome analyses of pelvic floor therapy (Anderson et al. 2005, 2006). We have also used other psychosocial instruments including Brief Symptom Inventory, Beck Anxiety, and Perceived Stress Scale to study neuroendocrine psychiatric influences associated with CPPS (Anderson et al. 2008).

Physical examination

After carefully documenting a thorough medical history of the pelvic pain, it is time to examine the patient. He should be informed that the examination is discovery in nature and will be gentle and avoids any exacerbation of the existing discomfort. The patient removes all clothing from the waist down and assumes a dorsal lithotomy position with the legs spread and heels in the stirrups (as in a female examination). The abdominal exam is easily accomplished under these circumstances. Prior to a prostate examination and massage we palpate the pelvic muscles seeking actual trigger points (TrPs) or specific discomfort zones, particularly the endopelvic muscles and tissue surrounding the prostate. Examination in this position allows palpation of the suprapubic region over the sigmoid bowel, bladder and rectus abdominis and oblique muscles. With the physician sitting at the foot of the examining table the genitalia, spermatic cord and anal areas are inspected. The pull-out extension of the examining table allows the examiner to have elbow leverage for internal pelvic muscle palpation and direct visualization of the penis and the urethral opening to collect prostatic fluid. We find it convenient and efficient to collect the fluid with a sterile glass pipette, the prostatic secretion drops accumulating with capillary action as they appear at the penile meatus; very important when only one or two precious drops are visible to examine and culture. We typically ask the patient not to urinate prior to the examination. This allows palpation of the partially full bladder and tenderness may be found. Furthermore, the patient should void a small amount of urine after a prostate massage to collect prostatic fluid by centrifugation if none is expressed and to provide a culture and sensitivity specimen.

In our evaluation at Stanford, as do most urologists, we examine the prostate for gland consistency, whether it is soft or ‘boggy’, whether there are areas of induration or hardness – this may represent fibrosis or scarring from previous inflammation – but we must remain ever vigilant for adenocarcinoma. It would not be appropriate to massage a prostate gland containing cancer. After checking muscles and tender points, we methodically massage the prostate gland, beginning at the base and milking it toward the centre on each side to express prostatic fluid into the urethra. The prostate is composed of 20–30 small microscopic tunnels (acini) emanating from the periphery of the prostate. Each glandular unit is connected to the outside world by a tiny duct that opens into the urethra on each side of the primary seminal vesicles’ ejaculatory duct in the centre of the prostate – the verumontanum. These tiny prostate ducts expel the enzyme-rich prostatic secretion with smooth muscle prostate contractions at the time of sexual ejaculation. Once the prostatic fluid has been collected, the patient then voids a small volume to provide a washout of prostatic fluid that can be separated, analysed and submitted for bacterial culture. We advise patients to refrain from any sexual ejaculation for 7 days prior to coming in for the examination to afford a better opportunity to maximize collection of prostatic fluid. Older men typically have more prostatic fluid because the gland is larger, having increased in size with age. Younger men find it a challenge to refrain from sexual ejaculation for a week.

We examine the prostatic fluid microscopically in our office laboratory after staining with safranin red and crystal violet; this staining helps identify white cells and improves the microscopic review. We quantify the number of white cells in the prostatic fluid using a haemacytometer and record the result as number of leucocytes per microlitre. This allows us to compare with counts from normal, asymptomatic men and to track changes as a treatment programme is instituted. We conduct this careful analysis of the prostatic fluid partly for academic reasons of clinical research. However, quantifying the degree of inflammation from massaged ducts has failed to yield any correlation with patient pain symptoms. This relationship between pain and prostate gland inflammation is poorly understood.

Prostatic massage has been utilized as treatment for CP by several generations of urologists, particularly prior to the advent of antibiotics. In a report from a popular Philippine study, repeated prostatic massages reveal occult micro-organisms. Therapeutic benefit from massage derives from expression of poorly emptying ductal acini and may diminish smooth muscle prostatic pressure. Some have proposed massage plus antibiotic treatment (Shoskes & Zeitlin 1999). In his study, prostate massage plus antibiotics for 2–8 weeks produced 40% resolution of symptoms, 20% significant improvements; however, 40% had no improvement. There was no correlation between inflammatory content and bacterial cultures. Our opinion favours repetitive massage of the prostate, not for emptying the gland, but rather to relieve pelvic tension and release myofascial TrPs. We continue to be extremely sceptical of the concept of occult bacteria that need to be ‘massaged out’.

The prudent physician must rule out other diagnostic possibilities, including urethral stricture, urethritis, epididymitis, seminal vesicle cysts, cancer of the prostate, urethra, bladder or testis, tuberculosis of the urinary or genital tract, urinary calculus disease (urolithiasis) and other treatable entities. A serum PSA (prostate-specific antigen) laboratory test should be done for men over the age of 40, and men with a long smoking history or age greater than 60 years should have a urinary cytology done. Some of these other diagnostic possibilities associated with UCPPS may require ancillary examinations such as cystoscopy, transrectal ultrasound, CT scans, urodynamic studies and even magnetic resonance studies of the pelvis and lower spine. These ancillary examinations should be carefully considered and selected out of significant clinical suspicion, not as a systematic course of evaluation.

Imaging of the prostate in chronic prostatitis

We recommend transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) to image the prostate gland. It has not gained wide acceptance as a method of evaluation for PPS but may provide valuable information demonstrating inflamed tissue, the presence of stones in the ducts (representing urinary mineral deposits), swelling and thickening of seminal vesicles (semen storage organs behind the prostate) and accurate measurement of the size of the gland. Abdominal ultrasound and CT are inaccurate and magnetic resonance of the prostate is not cost-effective. Many urologists have observed intraprostatic calcifications on TRUS. Older men (55+) develop benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and it commonly associates with PPS. Most workers believe the ultrasound hyperdense areas represent deposits of urinary metabolite crystals and inspissated secretions within the ducts. These concretions are commonly seen exuding from the peripheral zone of the prostate at the time of transurethral resection. It has been noted, however, that a substantial percentage of younger men with chronic prostate or pelvic pain have such calcifications (Geramoutsos et al. 2004). Shoskes et al. (2007) imaged 47 men with PPS symptoms averaging 60 months and reported 47% of them had such calcifications. There was no difference in the CPSI score between those who did or did not have the finding; however, the men with stones had less discomfort and greater leucocyte presence.

Japanese investigators utilized computerized X-ray images and angiography to evaluate CPP. They demonstrated excellent three-dimensional graphic images of veins around the prostate and found considerable congestion in these veins behind the bladder and along the sides of the prostate in patients suffering with pain. The veins on the surface of the prostate were much thicker in diameter than in subjects with no pain – essentially varicose veins of the prostate. It suggests heightened tension in the muscles of the pelvic floor and supports our view that CPP syndromes are associated with chronic pelvic muscle tension.

Urodynamics

One investigative tool to evaluate urinary and prostate function consists of neurophysiological measurements with urodynamics. This diagnostic approach evaluates sensory and physiological function of the related smooth and striated muscle in the bladder, prostate and external sphincter. This testing consists of placing a small pressure-sensing catheter into the bladder to detect changes in bladder pressure with filling, sensation of urgency, simultaneously monitoring the urethral voluntary sphincter pressure activity and associated pelvic floor function. An important component of this testing requires a pressure sensor in the rectum to monitor simultaneous abdominal pressure. We utilize electrical sensors patched to the skin around the anal verge to detect action motor potentials within the superficial pelvic floor, both with relaxation and voluntary contraction, but primarily to determine how much relaxation is achieved when attempting to urinate. Bladder pressure and flow dynamics reveal the synergy with the pelvic floor, demonstrating the effects of chronic tension or lack of efferent stimulation. At the minimum one should perform a urinary free-flow rate with voided volume, resting water cystometry, a pressure-flow study of micturition and electromyographic (EMG) studies of external sphincter. Independent anal or vaginal probe EMG studies as performed with biofeedback can also be quite revealing in these patients.

Many workers suggest relationships between chronic pain and smooth or striated muscle function of the urinary bladder, prostate or sexual organs. Small, undocumented reports of findings in PPS patients suggest possible avenues of scientific pursuit. Comparison of symptoms, morphological, microbiological and urodynamic findings in patients with PPS have existed for decades (Strohmaier & Bichler 2000, Lee 2001, Hetrick et al. 2006, Hafez 2009). A common theme emerges suggesting functional obstruction at the level of the bladder neck and external sphincter, high sensitivity during filling cystometry, and poor or interrupted urinary flow. Abnormally low urinary flow rates <15 ml/s were found in 65% of patients. Some patients respond to α-blocking agents as therapy for UCPPS while most do not.

Isolated male orchalgia (pain in the testicles)

Chronic orchalgia, or pain in the testis, vexes a lot of young men and they reluctantly bring this to the attention of their physician. Some would suggest that isolated male orchalgia does not belong with the phenotypes of PPS. However, pelvic floor dysfunction studies suggest an extremely large proportion of these patients (88%) exhibit an increased pelvic floor resting tone at a mean of 6.7 μV – values >3.0 μV are considered abnormal (Planken et al. 2010). Testicular pain occurs most commonly in young men in their 20s and 30s and requires a careful history and physical examination because this is also the age group where testicular cancer most commonly occurs. Usually the examination is negative, with the patient complaining of pain localized to one side or the other but occasionally bilateral, and when the epididymis is squeezed during examination it reproduces the pain for the patient. Rarely does a vasectomy result in such tenderness or chronic orchalgia. The common urologic diagnosis is sterile epididymitis, but there is virtually no evidence for any inflammatory condition.

We must understand the nerve supply to the testis so that the diagnostic evaluation makes functional sense. Scrotal pain may arise from numerous factors and any organ that shares the same nerve pathway with the scrotal contents can present as referred pain in this region, such as the ureter and the hip. Sensory nerve fibres are carried in the branches of the genitofemoral and ilioinguinal nerves. Increased fluid around the testicle (hydrocele), varicocele, or epididymal cysts (spermatocele), are usually coincidental and are rarely the cause of the chronic orchalgia. This pain is almost always spermatic cord/epididymal neurological pain and not testicular organ pain.

Removal of the epididymis as an approach to treat chronic testis pain has met with variable success and positive results range from 32% (Sweeney et al. 2008) to 85% in post-vasectomy pain (Hori et al. 2009). Selective denervation is also successful using a microscopic method to remove all nerve fibres from the spermatic cord arising from the testicular tissue or the scrotal contents. We always perform at least three selective long-acting anaesthetic spermatic cord nerve blocks as a diagnostic trial, usually with a cortisone solution. Several of these nerve blocks at intervals may relieve the cyclical nature of this syndrome. Microscopic denervation after successful spermatic cord block has shown successful results with complete relief of pain in 76–97% of selected patients (Levine & Matkov 2001, Heidenreich et al. 2002). A recent report suggests that sacral nerve root electrical stimulation may be beneficial in these patients, and in some cases skin surface electrical stimulation has been helpful (McJunkin et al. 2009).

Bladder pain syndrome

BPS occurs most commonly as a UCPPS in the female patient with a prevalence of about 300 per 100 000 women and 10–20% of that number in men. Using a ‘high-sensitivity’ definition of the disease it is thought that as many as 6% of women in the US meet the BPS symptom criteria. This syndrome was previously known by the diagnosis of interstitial cystitis (IC). The IC diagnosis implies an inflammation within the wall of the urinary bladder, involving gaps or spaces in the bladder mucosa. However, not all patients have this histological picture and there is no histology pathognomonic of this syndrome that remains a broad clinical diagnosis. The term BPS focuses on the total pain symptom complex occurring for longer than 6 months rather than any specific organ disease. The primary symptom is pelvic pain, pressure or discomfort perceived to be related to the urinary bladder. There has been considerable effort devoted to define objective diagnostic criteria, but the typical clinical picture includes pain upon bladder filling and often immediately after emptying. Urinary voided volumes are typically lower than normal. Many workers feel that IC associated with inflammatory mucosal lesions, neovascularity and ulcers originally described by Hunner represent a more advanced or serious level of disease. The disorder of BPS, as in PPS, has manifestations clearly characterized as a biopsychosocial disorder and often appears simultaneously with other pain syndromes such as irritable bowel, fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome.

Medical assessment

The initial evaluation should include a urinary frequency and voided volume chart (preferably including timed fluid intake as well), focused physical examination looking for TrPs, urinalysis and urine culture. Surprisingly, about 30% of patients are found to have a bacterial infection history and these patients will often demonstrate recurrent bacteriuria when followed on a long-term basis. However, the presence of bacteria does not impact the pelvic pain symptoms and treating with antibiotics makes no difference in the symptom complex. There has been no scientific evidence that bacteriuria itself induces or plays a pathogenic role in IC.

Cytology and cystoscopy are recommended if clinically indicated. It is reasonable to consider urodynamics if there are elements of dysfunctional voiding, particularly if overactive bladder contractility is suggested. Pelvic imaging should be reserved for specific indications. Most of the time gynaecologic evaluation has been accomplished utilizing laparoscopy if there exists any suspicion of gynaecologic disorder.

If cystoscopy is indicated then it is most appropriate to perform the examination with hydrodistension of the bladder under general or spinal anaesthesia to physical capacity at 80 cm water pressure. More advanced and longer-duration bladder disease often associates with lower physical capacity at these pressures. Upon endoscopic emptying, typical petechial haemorrhages appear within the submucosal capillary vessels, with or without evidence of mucosal ulceration. This has been an accepted diagnostic and research criterion for diagnosis of IC when occurring with the clinical picture of painful bladder syndrome (PBS). The hydrodistension under anaesthesia may provide beneficial therapy in that about 30% of patients find relief from their bladder pain, often for several months. Aside from bladder stretching under anaesthesia, local therapy includes intermittent vesical instillations of agents such as heparin, cortisone, buffered lidocaine, and experimental approaches such as capsaicin solution to eliminate C-fibre activation. There are current clinical trials underway demonstrating the safety and efficacy of detrusor muscle injections of botulinum toxin A to alleviate the pain of IC. When pelvic pain involves the fascia and muscles outside of the bladder a neuromuscular approach is more effective.

Neuromuscular treatment

It is beyond the scope of this chapter to discuss the myriad therapeutic modalities that have been utilized to relieve UCPPS. We refer the reader to previous chapters and review articles with the caveat that very few level 1 or 2 evidence-based treatments have been documented and most cannot be recommended (Hanno et al. 2010). Traditional therapy includes antibiotics, α-blockers, anti-inflammatory agents, phytotherapy, minimally invasive therapies, heat therapy, neuromodulation and surgical invasion, including the extreme of radical extirpation of the urinary bladder and/or prostate. While urologists are trained surgeons, surgical procedures have failed to offer any solution to the CPPS. Urologists should carefully consider alternative and complementary methods of patient care, especially in relationship to CPP. At the same time, medical practice guidelines should be evidence-based and not advocated solely on opinions of efficacy. Well-educated patients and patient advocates seek greater control of their treatment and the planning thereof by focusing on preventative maintenance issues and partnering with physicians in managing their disorder.

Neuromuscular basis for therapy

Many investigators believe that the source of pain and dysfunction in men and women with CPP, including chronic testicular pain, relates to chronically tense myofascial tissue in and around the pelvic floor (Anderson et al. 2005, Berger et al. 2007, Planken et al. 2010). In simple and broad terms we can describe the neuromuscular disorder as pelvic myoneuropathy. Traditionally, the diagnosis of UCPPS depends upon a descriptive symptom complex. However, it is now clear that UCPPS is multifaceted and not all patients have the same constellation of symptoms, or respond in the same way to single treatment modalities. Because the pathogenic mechanisms associated with the development of pelvic genitourinary symptoms are unknown, it remains difficult to explain the role of painful myofascial tissue. One of the phenotypes proposed for UCPPS includes a domain of tenderness of skeletal muscle and this has been the focus of a growing number of clinical research trials and publications. A recent NIH-sponsored, multicentre study demonstrated the feasibility of performing clinical therapeutic trials utilizing muscle and connective tissue physiotherapy (myofascial physical therapy) to treat UCPPS (Fitzgerald et al. 2009). A comparator group of subjects was randomized to receive total-body traditional Western massage with no myofascial release or internal pelvic therapy. In the NIH trial the original physician investigators quantified the degree of tenderness in muscle groups prior to corroboration by physical therapists trained in such techniques. A clear discrepancy existed between what physicians scored for subjective pain on examination and what the physical therapists reported; physicians found 28% less tenderness on their examination (P < 0.01). Patients randomized to the myofascial physical therapy group underwent connective tissue manipulation to all body wall tissues of the abdominal wall, back, buttocks and thighs as well as internal pelvic muscles clinically found to contain connective tissue abnormalities and/or myofascial TrP release to painful myofascial TrPs. This was done until a texture change was noted in the treated tissue layer. Manual techniques such as TrP barrier release with or without active contraction or reciprocal inhibition, manual stretching of the TrP region and myofascial release were used on the identified TrPs. A secondary outcome of the pilot study revealed good patient response to the internal and external myofascial physical therapy as compared to generalized external Western massage only (57% versus 28%, respectively). This form of therapy was expanded to a larger trial in women suffering from IC/PBS and the results show an equally impressive response to the manual physical therapy.

We are not the first doctors to have considered the kind of treatment we are describing in this book. As early as 1934 there were a few physicians who understood that pelvic pain is related to tension or spasm of the pelvic muscles. The following sequence lists a chronological description of development.

Progress of discovery and understanding of chronic pain syndromes and myofascial trigger points

1838 Recaimer – First describes syndrome of tension myalgia of pelvic floor in ‘Stretching massage and rhythmic percussion in the treatment of muscular contractions’.

1937 Thiele – Describes tonic spasms of levator ani, coccygeus and piriformis muscles and their relationship to pain.

1942 Travell et al. – First description of myofascial TrPs as common cause of chronic muscle pain.

1951 Dittrich – First recognized pelvic pain occurring as a result of referral from TrPs in subfascial fat and perifascial tissue.

1963 Thiele – Successful use of digital massage of spastic levator muscles subsequently described as ‘Thiele massage’.

1977 Sinaki et al. – Consolidates various syndromes of pelvic musculature under one terminology: tension myalgia of the pelvic floor. Uses combined treatment with rectal diathermy, Thiele’s massage and relaxation exercises.

1983 Travell and Simons – Publish the first edition of Myofascial Pain and Dysfunction: The Trigger Point Manual in 1983; identifying internal muscles and areas of referred pain from myofascial TrPs. Second edition published in 1992.

1984 Slocum – Treats TrPs related to the abdominal pelvic pain syndrome in women using locally injected anaesthetic. Indicates emotional stress frequently a potentiating factor, not a cause for CPP.

1994 Hong – Developed rabbit animal model to identify myofascial TrPs. With colleagues, subsequently publishes 36 animal clinical and 12 basic science articles to advance our understanding.

2004 Simons – Reviews the present understanding of myofascial TrPs as they relate to musculoskeletal dysfunction.

George Thiele, M.D., was a colorectal surgeon who developed a physical treatment for pelvic pain that he generally included under the name coccygynia (pain of the coccyx or tail bone). Thiele’s findings were later confirmed by Shapiro in 1937, who referred to pain around the coccyx as the Thiele syndrome. In an article in 1963, Thiele reported on 324 patients who had pelvic pain in and around the rectum and anus. He, along with several other researchers, realized that removal of the coccyx failed to help anyone with pelvic pain other than those who had severe trauma to the tailbone. Furthermore, he acknowledged that there was no evidence of any disease of the coccyx or adjacent areas.

Mehrsheed Sinaki, M.D., was a physician at the Mayo Clinic in the department of physical medicine and rehabilitation throughout most of the 1970s. Doctor Sinaki reviewed the medical records of patients who had a diagnosis of pelvic pain in general, but at that time more often referred to by the terms piriformis syndrome, coccygodynia, levator ani spasm syndrome, proctalgia fugax, or simply rectal pain. Absent were reports of urinary symptoms or of diagnoses including prostatitis, IC, or some of the other conditions we include in this book. Sinaki acknowledged that the conditions he examined were obscured by many vague and chronic complaints. Furthermore, he found, as we do today, that a general medical exam and routine laboratory and X-ray exam are unremarkable. He wrote:

Sinaki believed that the definitive test for the conditions he was reviewing was the digital–rectal examination in which the doctor inserts a gloved lubricated finger into the rectum to feel the state of the muscles. He observed, however, that the normal digital–rectal examination was inadequate to assess the tenderness of the muscles. Figures 12.112.5 demonstrate the internal pelvic muscle palpations and typical referral of discomfort when a TrP is involved. Figures 12.6 and 12.7 show typical pain referral patterns from external palpations.

We previously indirectly measured the internal pelvic level of muscle tension via the rectum and vagina of patients consulting us for pelvic pain and dysfunction. Men with PPS show an increased level of pelvic floor muscle tension on EMG. Many women demonstrate weakness and inability to contract pelvic muscles; however, this is only a surface recording of the anal or vaginal muscles not the entire pelvic floor or deeper pelvic muscles around the prostate. There is emerging interest in utilizing behavioural pelvic floor rehabilitation techniques in treating male CPPS. A group from Northwestern University Medical School in Chicago used biofeedback in pelvic floor re-education as well as bladder training for this disorder (Clemens et al. 2000). They recognized that pelvic floor tension myalgia contributes to the symptoms. They studied a small group of 19 men, average age of 36 years, and treated them with this non-interventional process. The men showed improvement, particularly in their urinary scores, but also had a significant decrease in their median pain scores, from 5 to 1 on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worse symptoms). Dr. Howard Glazer reports on his extensive experience utilizing biofeedback in a previous chapter.

The International Association for the Study of Pain defines pain using descriptions and does not address the mechanism of pain. Zermann et al. (2001) found 88% of men with PPS had tender myofascial palpation. Berger et al. (2007) also showed that pelvic tenderness is not limited to the prostate in men with PPS. They studied 62 men with PPS and 98 men without pelvic pain, examining tenderness of ten external pelvic tender points, seven internal pelvic tender points, and other tender points as described by the American College of Rheumatology for evaluation of fibromyalgia. They found 75% of men with PPS had prostate tenderness but so did 50% of normal controls. They also observed no correlation with leucocytosis in expressed prostatic fluid.

Similarly, a recent collaborative network study of 384 symptomatic men with PPS and 121 asymptomatic controls revealed that 51% of PPS patients had tenderness at 11 anatomical sites versus 7% of controls. The most common tender site in this survey was the prostate itself, but once again tenderness specifically did not correlate with any inflammation in the gland as determined by analysis of expressed prostate secretion. The prostate is anatomically intimate with the levator muscles and fascia of puborectalis and pubococcygeus and therefore these muscles would undoubtedly be stimulated during prostate manipulation.

Sites of pain have also been recently described for PBS by Warren and colleagues (2008) who hypothesized that careful, systematic analysis of pain experienced by such patients would indicate patterns that might provide clues to pathogenesis. In the 226 women surveyed, 66% reported two or more pain sites; mean of 2.1 sites per patient. Suprapubic prominence and changes in the voiding cycle are consistent with the bladder being the site of pain generation, but do not prove the point. Women with vulvodynia or urethral syndrome do not differ in these pain sites. When specific TrPs are discovered in females, it is feasible to augment myofascial release therapy with TrP injection utilizing local anaesthetic. In a limited study by Langford et al. (2007) 18 women were treated with localized injection and 13 of the 18 women (72%) were improved at 3 months follow-up; six were completely pain-free.

Wise-Anderson Stanford Protocol

After many years of treating patients with UCPPS utilizing both manual physical therapy as well as cognitive behaviour relaxation training, we determined that intensive or immersion therapy over several days was an ideal method to break long-term pain cycles and teach patients to care for themselves. Patients are evaluated as above by a urologist and then immerse themselves into daily physical therapy and paradoxical relaxation training over a 6-day period. We have conducted over 80 monthly sessions of this type, and several months of follow-up (3–24 months) have revealed significant benefit to a large proportion of patients. There has been a significant decrease in NIH-CPSI scores (P < 0.001) and more than 50% of the patients have global response assessments categorized as moderately or markedly improved. In addition a large number of the patients have shown significant psychological benefit (Anderson et al. 2010).

We reported a case series study of self-referred men with longstanding CPPS and attempted to describe the relationship between the locations of myofascial TrPs or restrictive muscular tissue, both internal and external to the pelvis, and the sites of pain initially described by the patients at the time of their evaluation (Anderson 2009). We hypothesized that palpation of certain myofascial TrPs would reproduce the pain sensations experienced by the patients.

The same physical therapist performed manual myofascial tissue palpation on all subjects. A traditional palpation force of approximately 4 kg/cm2 for tender points (recommended for examination of fibromyalgia) was used for the assessment of pain. Pain was ranked as 0 (none) to 3+ (severe) for each area examined. Only categorical pain levels of 2+ or 3+ were counted as ‘Yes – pain is present’, while scores of 0 or 1+ were counted as ‘No pain’. Sets of muscles that typically reproduced pain sensation in specific locations referred from TrPs were chosen for the investigation.

The median age of the 72 men with CPPS in this analysis was 40 years (range 20–72; IQR = 32, 49) with a median duration of symptoms of 44 months (range 4–408 months). The severity of symptoms at the time of the initial examination was measured by the pain VAS (visual analogue scale) score and NIH-CPSI score with higher scores representing greater severity. The median VAS score was 5 out of 10 (range 1–9). The median NIH-CPSI overall score was 27 (43 is the maximum possible) with a median pain domain score of 13 (possible maximum = 21), urinary complaints of 5 (possible maximum = 10) and quality of life score of 10.5 (possible maximum = 12). The median total number of self-reported locations of pain was 4 (IQR = 3, 5) out of a possible 7 pre-designated sites. There was no correlation between pain VAS score and total number of painful locations (R = –0.195; P = 0.11). Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in pain VAS score by the presence of pain in any specific location. However, we did find that tenderness in the puborectalis and/or pubococcygeus muscles was associated with a higher pain VAS score (P = 0.013, Mann-Whitney test). Table 12.2 presents the internal and external muscles palpated and how frequently they elicited a painful response. For example, 90.3% (65/72) of men stated that they felt pain associated with palpation of the puborectalis and/or pubococcygeus muscles.

Painful TrPs, areas of restriction and associated pain location

Table 12.3 presents the muscles palpated and frequencies of referred pain to specific locations, whether or not the patient had initially complained of pain in that anatomical area. For example, palpation of the puborectalis and/or pubococcygeus muscles elicited pain in the penis in 93% (67/72) of the patients. At least two of the ten TrPs could elicit or refer pain to every one of the anatomical sites in a statistically significant proportion of patients (P values determined by the Fisher’s exact test) and every TrP was able to reproduce pain in at least one site. The most reactive muscles were the rectus abdominis and external obliques; palpation of TrPs in these muscles elicited pain in four of the seven sites. Perineal pain was the most reproducible, being elicited by eight out of ten TrPs.

The frequency with which TrP palpation referred pain to a patient’s self-reported chronic pain location is presented in Table 12.3. The odds ratio is shown when calculable. For example, among the 66 patients with penile pain, 64 (97%) experienced this pain after palpation of TrPs in the puborectalis and/or pubococcygeus muscles. The odds ratio of 32.0; 95% CI (2.3, 461.0) implies that these patients were 32 times more likely to have penile pain reproduced with this muscle palpation than patients without penile pain. However, a more conservative interpretation lies with the lower limit of the CI. Thus with 95% certainty, patients with penile pain are at least 2.3 times more likely to have their pain reproduced with this TrP than patients who do not report penile pain. The odds ratio or P value could not be derived in some cases because of zero cell counts. For example, eight of 20 patients (40%) had coccyx or buttocks pain elicited by palpation of the gluteus maximus. None of the patients without coccyx or buttocks pain experienced pain in this location after palpation (0/52 without pain versus 8/20 with pain, P < 0.001, Fisher’s exact test); the odds ratio was not calculable because of the zero cell count. Table 12.3 reveals that pain in each location could be reproduced by at least one TrP in a statistically significant proportion of patients with that prior pain report; rectal and coccyx/buttocks pain were each elicited by four different TrPs. Palpation of the external oblique muscles referred pain to the suprapubic area, testes and groin at least 80% of the time in patients with pain in these locations. Moreover, 80% (8/10) of the TrP palpations reproduced pain in at least one location, and palpation of the rectus abdominis elicited pain in four locations (penis, perineum, rectum and suprapubic area). Repeated palpation of a muscle group had a consistent effect in pain referral. These physical examination findings may lead to greater understanding of pathogenic mechanisms and lead to more focused therapy.

Our sample size of 72 subjects is small, although we were able to demonstrate both statistically and clinically significant associations between certain TrPs and specific pain locations. No asymptomatic men were examined as control subjects; therefore we are unable to compare how patients without CPPS would respond to these palpations. However, the purpose of this study was to examine patients with CPPS rather than compare their responses to normal subjects. Finally, it is difficult to objectively measure pain and thus we relied on patients’ self-reported responses. If a painful location was not reported during the initial history, we could not account for it in our later analyses. We recognize that some individuals may be naturally more sensitive to muscle palpations and pressure that could cause pain in the pelvic region even though they do not suffer from CPPS.

The personal therapeutic wand for chronic pelvic pain

The ideal therapeutic provider combination for care of UCPPS should include a urologist evaluating the urologic signs and symptoms in a systematic fashion, a knowledgeable psychologist to provide psychosocial interpretation, psychological support and cognitive behaviour training such as progressive relaxation therapy and possible medical hypnosis, and a skilled physiotherapist who understands myofascial TrPs, how to release them and how to teach the patient self care. It is not always possible for patients to find follow-up physiotherapy from those who may be appropriately trained and skilled in the techniques required. We have introduced and taught patients self-treatment utilizing a personal therapeutic wand that can be inserted into the rectum or vagina to seek and release TrPs (Figures 12.812.10). Previous self-treatment devices have been inadequate to reach appropriate TrPs accurately and safely. Patients are carefully instructed regarding the location of their TrPs and then observed and guided to using the wand within specific pressure ranges to avoid any mucosal trauma or induction of internal tissue damage. These pressures have ranged between 2 and 6 pounds per square inch. Fibromyalgia TrP testing is typically performed at 4 kilograms per square centimetre. In some instances we have been able to train a spouse or significant other to assist in administering the therapeutic wand. Aside from one or two limited minor rectal bleeding episodes, no significant adverse effects have been noted. Patients are prospectively enrolled into a clinical trial under Institutional Review Board approval and followed for a period of 6 months, evaluating safety and efficacy. The intention is to enrol and evaluate 200 patient subjects.

Paradoxical relaxation

An important foundation of the Wise-Anderson Stanford Protocol was established early by Dr. David Wise in an attempt to achieve pelvic floor relaxation effortlessly (Wise 2010). He stated that ‘Paradoxical Relaxation was a method that emerged in the trenches of chronic pain where I closed my own eyes, brought my attention to the inside, and dealt with the question of how I could stop the physical pain and anxiety in which I found myself.’ Nothing that he proposes is theoretical, but shared outcomes from the personal laboratory of his own relaxation practice.

Initially we used anal and vaginal electrodes to teach reduction of the electromotive impulses. Gradually it became more useful to enlist cognitive behavioural therapy and an adoption of the Dr. Edmund Jacobson method of progressive relaxation. Dr. Wise developed and now teaches and trains patients to perform intensive paradoxical relaxation for 25–45 minutes as well as daily moment to moment relaxation. It is possible to reliably calm tension, agitation and anxiety with pharmacological agents. The silver lining of suffering anxiety is that it motivates one to learn to profoundly relax. Frequently the patients learn respiratory sinus arrhythmia breathing to assist in reaching the levels of relaxation that are beneficial. The term ‘paradoxical’ relaxation refers to accepting the tension or other sensation associated with the pain but letting go of the effort to try to relax. The secret is learning to focus attention and prevent the mind from wandering away from the presence of mind to quiet the nervous system and achieve profound relaxation. Relaxation occurs when attention rests in sensation and not in thought. It is not letting go of focused attention and letting your mind go anywhere it wants to. If one is able to sustain long periods of focused attention, the ability to profoundly relax the pelvic floor and lower the activity of the autonomic nervous system will have a chance of becoming reliable or deep. When attention cannot be sustained long enough to permit the patient to become aware of the unconscious holding and guarding he or she is doing, the guarding tends to remain in place. The task is to remain focused and simultaneously relinquish any unnecessary effort in doing so. One teaching pearl reminds patients to observe the sensation of sitting on a toilet to urinate or move their bowels. It is the sensation of a slight drop in the pelvic floor through relaxation of both the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system simultaneously.

We have instituted recent clinical trials using medical hypnotherapy and patient self-hypnosis administered by an experienced psychologist experienced in this therapy. In addition we utilize parallel cognitive behavioural approaches. We are analysing the preliminary results of this pilot trial to consider expansion of research application. But it is apparent to virtually every clinician that therapeutic management must address the psychosocial and mental behaviour aspects of the problem.

References

Anderson R.U. Traditional therapy for chronic pelvic pain does not work: what do we do now? Nat. Clin. Pract. Urol.. 2006;3:145-156.

Anderson R.U., Wise D., Sawyer T., et al. Integration of myofascial trigger point release and paradoxical relaxation training treatment of chronic pelvic pain in men. J. Urol.. 2005;174:155-160.

Anderson R.U., Wise D., Sawyer T., et al. Sexual dysfunction in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: Improvement after trigger point release and paradoxical relaxation training. J. Urol.. 2006;176:1534-1539.

Anderson R.U., Orenberg E.K., Chan C.A., et al. Psychometric profiles and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. J. Urol.. 2008;179:956-960.

Anderson R.U., Wise D., Sawyer T., Glowe P., Orenberg E. 6-day intensive treatment protocol for refractory chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome using myofascial release and paradoxical relaxation training. J Urology. 2010;185:1294-1299.

Baranowski A.P., Abrams P., Berger R.E., et al. Urogenital pain–time to accept a new approach to phenotyping and, as a consequence, management. Eur. Urol.. 2008;53:33-36.

Berger R.E., Ciol M.A., Rothman I., et al. Pelvic tenderness is not limited to the prostate in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS) type IIIA and IIIB: comparison of men with and without CP?/CPPS. Biomedical Center Urology. 2007;7:17.

Clemens J.Q., Nadler R.B., Schaeffer A.J., et al. Biofeedback, pelvic floor re-education, and bladder training for male chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Urology. 2000;56:951-955.

Fall M., Baranowski A.P., Sohier E., et al. EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain. Eur. Urol.. 2010;57:35-48.

Fitzgerald M.P., Anderson R.U., Potts J., et al. Randomized multicenter feasibility trial of myofascial physical therapy for the treatment of urological chronic pelvic pain syndromes. J. Urol.. 2009;182:570-580.

Geramoutsos I., Gyftopoulos K., Perimenis P., et al. Clinical correlation of prostatic lithiasis with chronic pelvic pain syndromes in young adults. Eur. Urol.. 2004;45:333-337.

Hafez H. Urodynamic evaluation of patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Urotoday International Journal. 2009:2.

Hanno P., Lin A., Nordling J., et al. Bladder pain syndrome international consultation on incontinence. Neurourol. Urodyn.. 2010;29:191-198.

Heidenreich A., Olbert P., Engelmann U.H. Management of chronic testalgia by microsurgical testicular denervation. Eur. Urol.. 2002;41:392-397.

Hetrick D.C., Glazer H., Liu Y.W., et al. Pelvic floor electromyography in men with chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A case-control study. Neurourol. Urodyn.. 2006;25:46-49.

Hori S., Sengupta A., Shuklaw C.J., et al. Long-term outcome of epidiymectomy for the management of chronic epididymal pain. J. Urol.. 2009;182:1407-1412.

Langford C.F., Nagy S.U., Ghomeim G.M. Levator ani trigger point injections: An underutilized treatment for chronic pelvic pain. Neurourol. Urodyn.. 2007;26:59-62.

Lee J.C., Yang C.C., Kromm B.G., et al. Neurophysiologic testing in chronic pelvic pain syndrome: A pilot study. Urology. 2001;58:246-250.

Levine L.A., Matkov T.G. Microsurgical denervation of the spermatic cord as primary surgical treatment of chronic orchialgia. J. Urol.. 2001;165:1927-1929.

McJunkin T.L., Wuollet A.L., Lynch P.J. Sacral nerve stimulation as a treatment modality for intractable neuropathic testicular pain. Pain Physician. 2009;12:991-995.

Nickel J.C., Shoskes D.A., Irvine-Brid K. Clinical phenotyping of women with interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome: A key to classification and potentially improved management. J. Urol.. 2009;182:155-160.

Planken E., Voorham van der Zaim P.J., Lycklama Nijeholt A.B., et al. Chronic testicular pain as a symptom of pelvic floor dysfunction. J. Urol.. 2010;183:177-181.

Schaeffer A.J., Knauss J.S., Landis J.R., et al. Leukocyte and bacterial counts do not correlate with severity of symptoms in men with chronic prostatitis: The National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis cohort study. J. Urol.. 2002;168:1048-1053.

Shoskes D.A., Zeitlin S.I. Use of prostate massage in combination with antibiotics in the treatment of chronic prostatitis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis.. 1999;2:159-162.

Shoskes D.A., Lee C.T., Murphy D., et al. Incidence and significance of prostatic stones in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Urology. 2007;70:235-238.

Shoskes D.A., Nickel J.C., Dolinga R., et al. Clinical phenotyping of patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and correlation with symptom severity. Urology. 2009;73:538-542.

Stav K., Dwyer P.L., Roberts L. Pudendal neuralgia fact or fiction? Obstet. Gynecol. Surv.. 2009;64:190-199.

Strohmaier W.L., Bichler K.H. Comparison of symptoms, morphological, microbiological and urodynamic findings in patients with chronic prostatitis/pelvic pain syndrome. Is it possible to differentiate separate categories? Urol. Int.. 2000;65:112-116.

Sweeney C.A., Oades G.M., Fraser M., et al. Does surgery have a role in management of chronic intrascrotal pain? Urology. 2008;71:1099-1102.

Warren J.W., Langenberg P., Greenberg P., et al. Sites of pain from interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome. J. Urol.. 2008;180:1373-1377.

Weiss J.M. Pelvic floor myofascial trigger points: Manual therapy for interstitial cystitis and the urgency-frequency syndrome. J. Urol.. 2001;166:2226-2231.

Wise D. Paradoxical relaxation. In Wise D., Anderson R.U., editors: A Headache In The Pelvis: A new understanding and treatment for chronic pelvic pain syndromes, sixth ed., Sebastapol, CA: National Center for Pelvic Pain, 2008.

Zermann D.H., Ishigooka M., Doggweiler-Wiygul R., et al. The male chronic pelvic pain syndrome. World J. Urol.. 2001;19:173-179.