Evaluation of the effectiveness of sildenafil using questionnaire methods versus audio-visual sexual stimulation

AIM: In the present study, an audio-visual sexual stimulation (AVSS) test was used to evaluate the effectiveness of sildenafil, and the AVSS test was coevaluated with the international index of erectile function (IIEF) questionnaire. METHODS: Forty-two patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) were examined (age range, 28-73 years; mean, 51.9 +/- 11.4 years). Each patient answered the IIEF questionnaire and underwent laboratory tests and the AVSS test before administration of sildenafil. The IIEF questionnaire and AVSS test (1 h after administration of 25 mg or 50 mg sildenafil) were re-evaluated in the outpatient clinic 4 weeks later. Questions 3 and 4 of the IIEF test were used to evaluate the effectiveness of sildenafil. Sildenafil was determined to be effective if each score totalled four or five after administration. RESULTS: The rate of effectiveness of sildenafil was 52.4%, and the mean score of the IIEF 5 improved from 7.2 to 15.4 following treatment with sildenafil. The maximum and mean rigidity of the penile tip improved after the sildenafil treatment (36.1%vs 57.7% and 14.2%vs 35.8%, respectively). The maximum and mean rigidity of the penile base rose (42.4%vs 57.7% and 17.9%vs 36.8, respectively). Similarly, following treatment with sildenafil, the penile tumescence increased from 6.6 cm to 7.6 cm at the penile tip and from 7.5 cm to 8.5 cm at the penile base. CONCLUSIONS: In some ED patients the results of the IIEF questionnaire are not always consistent with those of objective evaluation, including AVSS. In these patients, combined assessment using the IIEF and AVSS might be more useful to evaluate the precise effectiveness of sildenafil, rather than relying on the IIEF results alone.     

Clinical efficacy of sildenafil in patients on chronic dialysis

PURPOSE: We evaluate the clinical efficacy of sildenafil citrate for patients who are on chronic dialysis and who have concomitant erectile dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 35 men (mean age 60.7 years) on dialysis and with erectile dysfunction of various etiologies were administered 25 to 100 mg sildenafil for at least 6 months. The International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire (IIEF), a global assessment question and partner satisfaction question were used to evaluate sildenafil efficacy. Patients also reported any adverse events that occurred during treatment. RESULTS: Treatment was effective for 28 of the 35 (80%) patients according to the results of the IIEF and global assessment questions. Partner satisfaction correlated with the IIEF overall response (0.79) and global assessment question results (0.86). No correlation was found between sildenafil failure and patient age, the etiology of erectile dysfunction, duration of erectile dysfunction, prior treatments, testosterone and prolactin blood levels, and the duration and etiology of renal failure. Of the 35 patients sildenafil was stopped due to intolerable headaches in 3 and because of lack of efficacy in 7. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil is an effective and safe treatment for erectile dysfunction in most patients on chronic dialysis.     

Efficacy and safety of sildenafil for treating erectile dysfunction in patients on dialysis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of sildenafil for erectile dysfunction (ED) in patients on haemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD), as men with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) often have sexual dysfunction (up to 82% among those on chronic dialysis). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with ED and in ESRD participated in an open-label prospective study. Thirty patients on HD and 11 on PD were asked to complete the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Fugl-Meyer life-satisfaction scale before and after sildenafil treatment. A total score in the erectile function domain of < or = 25 was accepted as indicating ED. All patients were started on a 25-mg dose, which was increased to 50 mg if there was no response after two trials. In addition, the overall efficacy question was used to evaluate satisfaction, and patients reported any side-effects during treatment. RESULTS: The erectile function and intercourse satisfaction domains improved significantly in both groups (P < 0.01). After sildenafil treatment, two-thirds of those on HD (20/30) and nine of the 11 on PD recovered their erectile function. The pretreatment scores on the IIEF and four domains (except sexual desire) of those responding were significantly higher than in those not responding (P < 0.05). The satisfaction rate on the overall efficacy question was 80% and 82% for the HD and PD groups, respectively. At least one side-effect was seen in 17 patients (43%); one had severe hypotension in the PD group. Overall, mild headache (seven patients, 18%) and flushing (12, 30%) were reported most often. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil is a safe and satisfactory drug for improving erectile function in patients with ESRD. Patients were satisfied whether treated by HD or PD. Pretreatment scores on the IIEF may be useful for predicting the success of treatment.     

Efficacy of sildenafil in male dialysis patients with erectile dysfunction unresponsive to erythropoietin and/or testosterone treatments

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of recombinant human erythropoietin (Epo), testosterone (T) or a combination of them in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in hemodialysis patients, as well as the efficacy of sildenafil in patients unresponsive to combination treatment. A total of 23 patients with ED were divided into two groups. The international index of erectile function (IIEF) was used to evaluate ED and treatment response. Patients received Epo or T treatments for 12 weeks. Later on both groups received combination treatment for another 12 weeks. Although IIEF scores increased significantly in both groups after the combination treatment, the score changes were similar. After combination treatment, 16 patients still having IIEF score <26 were given sildenafil treatment in combination with Epo while T was discontinued. Although the IIEF scores increased significantly in all patients (17.4%), only eight of them attained an IIEF score of > or =26. The baseline IIEF scores of the patients with satisfactory response to the sildenafil treatment were higher than those with unsatisfactory response. The patients with a score of > or =22 responded better to the treatment. Although Epo and/or T therapies could partially improve ED in male dialysis patients besides correcting renal anemia and hypogonadism, sildenafil treatment could improve ED in unresponsive patients. Especially, those with higher baseline IIEF scores benefited more.     

The efficacy of sildenafil in different etiologies of erectile dysfunction

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of sildenafil and success of treatment in particular etiological causes in erectile dysfunction lasting more than 3 months. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 141 patients between 27 and 78 years old without any cardiac compromise, despite controversial, which precludes sildenafil (Viagra) treatment, were included in this study. All patients had only International Index of Erectile Capacity Form (IIEF) for pre-treatment evaluation and 50 mg sildenafil was started. Patients were assessed monthly for 6 months thereafter. Erectile capacity changes were questioned by IIEF on each follow-up and 100 mg sildenafil was given in patients without a response and monthly follow-up was scheduled. All patients had SMA-12, hormonal analyses and penile colour Doppler ultrasonography during the treatment course. The difference between IIEF score of each patient was displayed by Paired-t test and p-values less than 0.05 was applied as significant. RESULTS: The average beginning IIEF score of 141 patients was 11.80 +/- 0.47 [6-22], and increased to 20.70 +/- 0.62 [6-30] after a month of 50 mg sildenafil treatment. The mean increase was 75.4% and found to be significant (p = 0.000, p < 0.05). The average IIEF scores were recorded as 22.57 +/- 0.69 after 3, and 22.12 +/- 0.24 after 6 months. There was no difference between these values and 2nd month controls (P3 month = 0.5675, P6 month = 0.6138, p > 0.05). A positive response was recorded in 102 patients (72.3%) and 39 (27.7%) patients were unresponsive. Doubled doses of sildenafil (100 mg) was effective in additional 17 patients. After overall treatment, 119 (84.4%) patients had benefit from sildenafil. Penile Doppler ultrasonography displayed arterial insufficiency in 79 (56.03%), veno-occlusive dysfunction in 14 (9.93%), mixt vascular pathology in 14 (9.93%) patients. Normal ultrasonographic findings in 32 patients (22.7%) were classified as psychogenic dysfunction. Among the organic causes, sildenafil was found to be most effective in arterial insufficiency group. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is a successful management modality in erectile dysfunction with minimal pre-treatment evaluation. As far as etiological causes concerned, sildenafil was found to be most effective in arterial insufficiency group and psychogenic group. The efficacy of sildenafil treatment has not been changed with the treatment time, since IIEF scores were stable during follow-up controls.     

The impact of sildenafil citrate on sexual satisfaction profiles in men with a penile prosthesis in situ

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of sildenafil in increasing penile glans tumescence and improving patient satisfaction in men with a penile prosthesis, as this remains a major treatment for erectile dysfunction but a common complaint is the lack of glans engorgement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To determine whether sildenafil combined with a penile prosthesis improves satisfaction, patients used an implant alone for at least 1 month, after which they completed the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire. The same patients were then given sildenafil citrate and completed the IIEF questionnaire after using the sildenafil/implant combination. RESULTS: Patients who responded to sildenafil with glans engorgement reported significantly greater satisfaction scores than with an implant alone. CONCLUSION: We currently offer sildenafil citrate after implantation to all men who have a penile prosthesis placed.     

Efficacy of oral sildenafil in hemodialysis patients with erectile dysfunction

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral sildenafil to treat erectile dysfunction (ED) in chronic renal failure in patients on hemodialysis (HD). A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of oral sildenafil (50 mg) administered as required in HD patients with ED was designed. Patients on HD for at least 6 mo and who had a stable relationship with a female sexual partner were included. Patients older than 70 yr with penile anatomic abnormalities, cirrhosis, diabetes, angina, severe anemia, and those who were on nitrate treatment or with a recent history of stroke or myocardial infarction were not included. The International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF) was employed to evaluate ED and treatment response. Forty-one patients were evaluated (21 received placebo, and 20 sildenafil). Baseline clinical and demographic parameters were similar in both groups. Sildenafil was associated with improvement in the score of all questions and domains of the IIEF, except those related to sexual desire. Using the erectile function domain to evaluate primary efficacy, improvement was observed in 85% of the sildenafil patients compared with 9.5% of placebo patients. Sildenafil use resulted in normal EF scores in 35% of sildenafil patients. Sildenafil was well tolerated. Headaches and flushing occurred in both groups. Dyspepsia was reported by two patients in the sildenafil group. In conclusion, oral sildenafil seems to be an effective and safe treatment for ED in selected patients with chronic renal failure on hemodialysis.     

Evaluation of male sexual function by the International Index of Erectile Function after deep dorsal vein arterialization of the penis.

PURPOSE: The objective of vascular surgery for erectile dysfunction is to provide long-term improvement of erectile function. We evaluated that claim after deep dorsal vein arterialization by a cross-sectional study of multifaceted male sexual function with the validated International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a mail survey of male sexual function after deep dorsal vein arterialization in 68 consecutive literate men who underwent surgery between 1984 and 1998 for severe erectile dysfunction. The IIEF questionnaire and a questionnaire on patient characteristics were answered in a self-administered and nominative manner. Scores of the responders pertaining to the 5 domains of male sexuality were compared with those of the control groups used for the psychometric validation of the IIEF. RESULTS: Of the patients 38 (55.9%) with a mean age plus or minus standard deviation of 46.5 +/- 11.9 years responded. Mean followup was 61.2 +/- 34.7 months. Compared to controls with erectile dysfunction controls men who underwent deep dorsal vein penile arterialization had significantly higher scores for erectile function, sexual desire, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction. Conversely compared with normal controls these patients reported significantly lower erectile function, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction scores, whereas sexual desire scores were similar in the 2 groups. No correlations were noted of the 5 IIEF domains with the duration of followup after arterialization. When erectile function scores were graded, 25.0% and 28.1% of patients reported no and or mild dysfunction, respectively, while 15.6% still complained of severe erectile dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term improvement in the various aspects of male sexual function was observed after deep dorsal vein penile arterialization in a significant proportion of patients.     

Sildenafil versus the vacuum erection device: patient preference

PURPOSE: We evaluated the preference of patients with erectile dysfunction who had been effectively treated with a vacuum erection device and then switched to sildenafil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 52 patients with erectile dysfunction who achieved satisfactory erectile function according to the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) while using a vacuum erection device were switched to an increasing dose of sildenafil (range 25 to 100 mg.) until satisfactory erection was maintained at least twice a week for at least 1 month. The 2 treatment methods were not used concomitantly. A total of 36 patients with a mean age of 59 years (range 35 to 77) who claimed to have achieved satisfactory erections with a vacuum erection device and sildenafil reported their preference to continue sildenafil or resume the use of a vacuum erection device, reasons for the choice and any adverse side effects. RESULTS: Of the 36 participants in whom the efficacy of sildenafil was similar to that of a vacuum erection device according to the IIEF scores (mean plus or minus standard deviation 61.6 +/- 10.4 and 62.5 +/- 6, respectively), 12 (33.3%) decided to resume use of a vacuum erection device (group 1) while 24 (66.6%) preferred to continue sildenafil (group 2). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding patient age or the etiology and duration of erectile dysfunction. The increase in the IIEF score while using a vacuum erection device was higher in group 1 than 2, with a mean of 66.75 versus 60.4, respectively (p = 0.002). The adverse side effects of sildenafil were the main reasons for preferring a vacuum erection device. Fewer ejaculatory difficulties, efficacy, comfort and ease of use were the main reasons for choosing sildenafil. CONCLUSIONS: Even in an era of effective oral medication, the vacuum erection device remains a preferred treatment option for a substantial number of patients with erectile dysfunction.     

Effect of sildenafil citrate on retinal functions: preliminary report on Humphrey visual field analysis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of sildenafil citrate treatment on visual field analysis (VFA) in patients using sildenafil citrate for erectile dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study on 18 male volunteers with erectile dysfunction, bilateral VFA was performed using the Humphrey 30-2 central standard threshold test. White-on-white (W/W) and blue-on-yellow (B/Y) protocols were used prior to treatment (baseline VFA) and after treatment (repeat VFA) with sildenafil citrate. W/W and B/Y baseline VFA and repeat VFA mean deviations (MD) were compared. RESULTS: The baseline MD for W/W and B/Y protocols were -1.34 +/- 1.8 and -2.59 +/- 2.1 dB, respectively, whereas the mean repeat MD for W/W and B/Y protocols were -1.79 +/- 2.21 and -2.83 +/- 3.31 dB, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between W/W and B/Y baseline and repeat VFA with respect to MD (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Sildenafil citrate causes no significant changes in Humphrey VFA in patients with erectile dysfunction.     

Treatment with sildenafil citrate in renal transplant patients with erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of sildenafil citrate in renal transplant patients with erectile dysfunction, as up to half of men with renal failure may be affected and only 60-75% recover potency after transplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with erectile dysfunction and a functioning renal transplant were treated using sildenafil (mean age 54 years, mean time on dialysis 35 months, mean time from transplantation 20 months). The hypogastric artery was not used during transplantation in any patient. Sildenafil citrate was prescribed at doses of 25 or 50 mg depending on baseline creatinine values and on the response, and plasma levels of cyclosporin/FK506 were monitored. RESULTS: Thirty patients (60%) had a satisfactory response, with a mean time on dialysis of 23 months. Six patients (12%) did not take the sildenafil and in 14 (28%) the drug was ineffective. The mean time on dialysis in this group was 43 months. Six patients (12%) had side-effects that in no case led to withdrawal of treatment. Plasma levels of cyclosporin/FK506 remained within the safety and efficacy limits in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with sildenafil citrate in renal transplant patients with erectile dysfunction is an effective and safe option, with few side-effects. Plasma levels of immunosuppressants are unchanged. The response was more effective in patients with a shorter time on dialysis, as penile vascular disease is less advanced.     

Is there a role for bilateral peak systolic velocity readings in a penile duplex ultrasound?

The penile duplex ultrasound (PDU) has been used as a diagnostic tool in erectile dysfunction (ED) management. It is currently recommended that peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end‐diastolic flow (EDF) should be recorded on both the right and left cavernosal arteries. However, the clinical utility of bilateral recordings is unknown. Our primary objective is to assess the clinical utility of bilateral recordings in ED treatment with sildenafil. A total of 77 patients were included. All patients had a standardised PDU and also completed the IIEF‐5 and started on‐demand treatment with sildenafil at 100 mg at baseline. The IIEF‐5 and EDITS were completed at the 6‐month follow‐up. The Spearman test was used to assess correlation. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. Improvement, cure and satisfaction were high (77.9%, 64.9% and 67.5%, respectively), and the median IIEF‐5 and EDITS were 25(22; 25) and 81.81(63.63; 88.63) respectively. The lowest PSV had the highest positive correlation with IIEF‐5 and EDITS (p = 0.436 and 0.379, respectively), and it could predict improvement, cure and satisfaction with a fair‐to‐good accuracy (AUC = 0.837, 0.750 and 0.749 respectively). The present study shows bilateral penile blood‐flow assessment is important, and attention should be focused on the lowest bilateral PSV.     

Positive effect of counseling and dose adjustment in patients with erectile dysfunction who failed treatment with sildenafil

OBJECTIVE: Many patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) stop using sildenafil due to subjective failure. This study examined whether counseling and maximal dosing (100 mg) could achieve better treatment compliance and could possibly improve treatment outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were recruited by newspaper advertisements and referred to 5 ED centers throughout the country. Details about their previous experiences with sildenafil were recorded and following an explicit explanation about the nature and action of the drug, were offered to enter the study. Instructions on drug use were provided during each visit in which four 100 mg Sildenafil tablets were provided. Treatment outcomes were assessed by the international index of erectile function (IIEF) questionnaire after taking 4 and 8 tablets. In 2 ED centers a short video with sexual counseling content was added in between visits. RESULTS: The study cohort was comprised of 220 patients aged 27-88 years. The majority reported having received limited or no instructions on drug use when sildenafil was first prescribed. A significant increase in IIEF erectile function domain scores (EFDS) between visits 1, 2 and 3 was observed (10.96+/-0.40, 16.73+/-0.51 and 17.82+/-0.55 mean+/-SE, respectively), with 23.6% of the study patients achieving normal erectile function at the end of the study. The parameters of age and initial severity of ED most influenced treatment success. CONCLUSIONS: Counseling and dose adjustment were directly influential in achieving an excellent response to a second trial of sildenafil in patients with ED who had previously failed treatment with the drug, and obviated their needing to seek more invasive measures.     

SILDENAFIL CITRATE AFTER RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY

PURPOSE: Erectile dysfunction continues to be a significant problem for men after radical retropubic prostatectomy despite nerve sparing techniques. Sildenafil citrate (Viagra) has proved effective for erectile dysfunction in many men. We determine the efficacy of sildenafil in men with erectile dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy and examine variables that may impact the response to treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 84 men were prescribed sildenafil after radical retropubic prostatectomy and asked to complete a series of questionnaires, including the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), on erectile function before and after sildenafil administration. The importance of factors, such as patient age, time since surgery, degree of cavernous nerve sparing, preoperative prostate specific antigen, Gleason score, clinical and pathological stage, and baseline postoperative erectile function, was examined. RESULTS: Of the 84 patients 45 (53%) had improved erections and 34 (40%) had improved ability for intercourse while taking sildenafil. Mean IIEF score for the erectile function domain increased from 9 to 14 (p <0.001). Orgasmic function (p = 0.004) and intercourse satisfaction (p = 0.009) also significantly improved. The degree of nerve sparing and baseline postoperative erectile dysfunction had a significant impact on the ability of sildenafil to improve erectile function (p = 0.010 and p <0.001, respectively) and total IIEF questionnaire responses (p = 0.031 and p <0.001, respectively). Age and pathological stage also appeared to have a significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil improved erectile function and the ability to have intercourse in more than half of men after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Baseline postoperative erectile function, which is dependent on the degree of nerve sparing technique, significantly impacts the likelihood that patients will respond to sildenafil.     

Prognostic factors predicting successful response to sildenafil after radical cystoprostatectomy

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in the management of erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical cystectomy (RC) and to define the different prognostic factors predicting the response to sildenafil in such a challenging group of patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred patients with ED following RC participated in an open-label, non-randomized, prospective, dose-escalation study. The median age of the patients was 53 years and the mean period after RC was 80.7 +/- 54.8 months. The study duration was 12 weeks, comprising a 4-week run-in period followed by two active treatment periods of 4 weeks each with 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil. Patients were assessed by means of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire at baseline and after each treatment period. At the end of the study, the Global Efficacy Assessment Question was used to evaluate treatment satisfaction. Factors affecting the patient's response to sildenafil were assessed by means of uni- and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The entire study group was suffering from severe ED at baseline, with a mean erectile function (EF) domain score of 6.5 +/- 0.93. EF scores improved to 12.2 +/- 7.76 and 18 +/- 10.3 with 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil, respectively. Sildenafil therapy significantly improved the ability of many patients to achieve and maintain an erection. The mean scores for question 3 of the IIEF were 1 +/- 0.14, 2.1 +/- 1.4 and 3 +/- 1.8 at baseline and with 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil, respectively, while the corresponding scores for question 4 were 1 +/- 0.10, 1.9 +/- 1.35 and 3 +/- 1.85. The satisfaction rate was 54%. The response was dose-dependent but the incidence of adverse effects increased from 6% with 50 mg of sildenafil to 34% with 100 mg. In univariate analysis, tumor histology and grade and postoperative partial tumescence were found to significantly impact the patient's response to sildenafil. In multivariate analysis, postoperative partial tumescence was the only independent predictive variable. CONCLUSIONS. Sildenafil was found to be a safe and satisfactory treatment for post-RC ED. The effect was dose-related. Patients with postoperative partial tumescence were the best responders.     

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) and oral phentolamine for the treatment of erectile dysfunction

This open-label, multi-center study from Mexico compared the efficacy and safety of oral sildenafil and phentolamine in men with erectile dysfunction. Patients received sildenafil (25-100 mg; n=123) or phentolamine (40 mg; n=119) for 8 weeks, and efficacy was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) as well as two global efficacy questions. Mean scores for the erectile function domain of the IIEF were significantly higher for sildenafil (27.23 +/- 0.62; P=0.0001) than for phentolamine (19.35 +/- 0.66). Approximately twice as many men receiving sildenafil had successful attempts at sexual intercourse (88% vs 42%), improved erections (95% vs 51.1%), and improved ability to have sexual intercourse (94.4% vs 46.4%) compared with phentolamine. The most common adverse events included rhinitis, headache, tachycardia, and nausea, with a higher frequency reported in patients receiving phentolamine than sildenafil (41% vs 33%), with the exception of headache, which was reported more frequently in sildenafil users. Overall, sildenafil was more effective and appeared to be better tolerated than phentolamine for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.     

Efficacy, safety and predictive factors of therapeutic success with sildenafil for erectile dysfunction in patients with different spinal cord injuries.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, open, prospective, before-after study. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil therapy for erectile dysfunction in patients with spinal cord injury, and the association between the response to sildenafil and factors such as causes and levels of spinal cord injury, grade of ASIA deficit, time since injury, orgasmic perception, and degree of baseline erection. SETTING: Homes of outpatients of 16 spinal cord injury units in Spain. METHOD: One hundred and seventy patients with erectile dysfunction secondary to spinal cord injury, from whom baseline data were collected on their sexual function, and who started treatment with sildenafil 50 mg. An efficacy assessment was made by the patient and his partner, and the score of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) was recorded. RESULTS: It was reported by 88.2% of the patients and 85.3% of their partners that treatment with sildenafil had improved their erections, regardless of the baseline characteristics of the spinal cord injury and erectile function. In responders, this improvement was confirmed by an increase from 12.5 to 24.8 points (P<0.001) of the Erectile Function Domain of IIEF. A significant improvement was also seen in patients' satisfaction with sexual activity and general satisfaction derived from sexual life. Preservation of orgasmic perception and a baseline degree of erection of 3 or 4 (P=0.006) were predictors of therapeutic success. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for erectile dysfunction caused by spinal cord injury, regardless of the cause, neurological level, ASIA grade, and time since injury. SPONSORSHIP: Spanish Society of Paraplegia.     

Efficacy of sildenafil citrate in treatment of erectile dysfunction: effect of type 2 diabetes

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy of sildenafil citrate in treatment of erectile dysfunction: effect of type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 466 male patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) were enrolled in this study. Of them 382 were diabetic and 84 were non-diabetic. Patients were screened for ED using the erectile function domain of the International Index for Erectile Function (IIEF). Patients underwent routine laboratory investigations, in addition to total testosterone and prolactin assessment. To assess the effect of diabetes on efficacy of sildenafil, we compared the pre and post sildenafil responses to erectile function domain, Q3, Q4. Overall satisfaction and global efficacy question (GEQ) were also assessed. RESULTS: Mean age +/- S.D. was 53 +/- 8.4 and 49.7 +/- 10.6 years for patients with and without diabetes respectively. There were significant associations between increased severity of ED and longer duration, poor metabolic control and presence of more than one diabetes-related complication (p < 0.05 for each). Differences were significant between pre and post sildenafil administration regarding erectile function domain, Q3, Q4 (p < 0.05 for each). In the non-diabetic patients the GEQ and the overall satisfaction were significantly higher than in diabetics (p < 0.05 for each). Global efficacy question was significantly low in patients with fair and poor metabolic control, longer duration of diabetes, and patients with diabetic complications (p < 0.05 for each). CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil is an effective treatment for diabetic patients with ED. Although the efficacy of sildenafil was negatively affected by factors as poor control and longer duration of diabetes and presence of more than one diabetes-related complication, however, the global efficacy and the overall patients' satisfaction were high.     

Combined oral therapy with sildenafil and doxazosin for the treatment of non-organic erectile dysfunction refractory to sildenafil monotherapy

The purpose of this work was to investigate the efficacy and safety of sildenafil in combination with doxazosin for the treatment of non-organic erectile dysfunction in patients who did not respond to sildenafil. We enrolled 28 patients with non-organic erectile dysfunction, for whom 3 months of sildenafil monotherapy had failed. They were divided in two random and homogeneous groups: 14 were treated with doxazosin (4 mg daily) and sildenafil (100 mg 1 h before sexual intercourse); the other 14 patients received sildenafil and placebo. The results were assessed by means of the IIEF questionnaire before the beginning of the study, after 30 days of therapy and after 60 days. Of the 14 patients treated with doxazosin and sildenafil, 11 (78.6%) showed a statistically significant increase of IIEF; in the placebo group, only one patient (7.1%) recorded a significant IIEF increase. The differences observed in the two groups were statistically very significant (P=0.0016). Blood pressure did not show significant alterations. Side effects were minimal and even present during sildenafil monotherapy. The combination therapy with sildenafil and doxazosin resulted in the safe and effective treatment of men with non-organic erectile dysfunction for whom sildenafil alone had failed.     

Sildenafil citrate treatment for erectile dysfunction after kidney transplantation

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to analyze the morbidity of organic erectile dysfunction (ED) in kidney-transplant patients and to evaluate the efficacy and reliability of sildenafil citrate treatment. METHOD: Sixty-five ED patients with normal graft function for 3 to 12 months after kidney transplantation were involved in our study. Erectile dysfunction was diagnosed in all the patients by the International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF). Among them, 10 patients were in light degree; 32 patients in moderate degree, and 23 patients in severe degree according to IIEF score. All of the patients underwent medical history, physical and chemical examinations. In each patient, the IIEF score, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and trough concentrations of cyclosporine were compared before and after taking sildenafil citrate at an initial dose of 50 mg every night. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients without ED before transplantation suffered ED after the operation, and 32 patients with ED before transplantation noticed worsening. Taking sildenafil citrate was effective in 53 patients (81.54%). There were no statistical differences in blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, or trough concentrations of cyclosporine in patients before and after sildenafil treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The morbidity of organic erectile dysfunction increased after transplantation. Sildenafil citrate treatment for ED in kidney-transplant patients was effective and safe. Graft function and trough concentrations of cyclosporine were not affected by sildenafil citrate.