Sildenafil versus continuous positive airway pressure for erectile dysfunction in men with obstructive sleep apnea： a comparat-ive study of their efficacy and safety and the patient＇s satisfaction with treatment

Aim： To assess the efficacy of sildenafil and continuous positive airway pressure （CPAP） in the treatment of concurrent erectile dysfunction （ED） with obstructive sleep apnea （OSA）, and to gauge the level of treatment satisfaction in patients and their partners. Methods： Forty men were treated for 12 weeks with sildenafil 100 mg （20 men） or CPAP during nighttime sleep （20 men）. Treatment efficacy was assessed by the rate of successful intercourse attempts, and satisfaction with treatment was assessed by patients＇ and partners＇ answers to question 1 of the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction. Results： Under sildenafil, 128 of 249 （51.4%） intercourse attempts were successful; under CPAP, 51 of 193 （26.9%） attempts were successful （^cp 〈 0.001）. Erectile function was improved in both groups. After sildenafil and CPAP treatment, the mean International Index for Erectile Function domain scores were 14.3 and 10.8, respectively （^bp = 0.025）, compared to 7.8 and 7 at baseline, respectively. CPAP and sildenafil were well tolerated. Sporadic episodes of nasal dryness under CPAP and transient headache and flushing under sildenafil were not significant. Fifty percent of patients treated with sildenafil and 25% with CPAP were satisfied with the treatment, and their partners were equally satisfied. The satisfaction scores for both patients and partners under sildenafil were superior to those under CPAP （^cP 〈 0.002）. Conclusion： Both sildenafil 100 mg and CPAP, used separately, had positive therapeutic impact but sildenafil was superior. Patients and their partners were more satisfied with sildenafil for the treatment of ED. However, because of the high proportion of dissatisfied men and partners, new therapeutic agents or a combination of the two methods must be studied further.     

Sildenafil combined with continuous positive airway pressure for treatment of erectile dysfunction in men with obstructive sleep apnea

Objectives To assess efficacy and safety of the combination of sildenafil and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and satisfaction with treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) in men with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Patients and methods Forty men suffering from OSA and concurrent ED were treated with CPAP after a thorough investigation. After a 4-week run-in period, the patients were randomly allocated to treatment for 6 weeks; 20 men to the combination group, receiving additionally 100 mg sildenafil on demand for intercourse, and 20 men to CPAP alone. After a 1-week washout phase, the two groups switched to the other treatment arm for an additional 6 weeks period. End points for efficacy evaluation were the percentage of successful attempts for intercourse based on an event log and the overall satisfaction with sildenafil in the treatment of ED. Results The patients recorded a total of 149 attempts for intercourse during the run-in phase with a success rate of 19.5%. During the 12 weeks of treatment, the success rate of intercourse attempts was 24.8% when only on CPAP and 61.1% when in combination with sildenafil (P < 0.001). Of the studied men, 70% were satisfied with the use of sildenafil while 30% remained unhappy with this additional treatment. Conclusions Sildenafil in combination with CPAP appears clearly superior to CPAP alone. The efficacy of this combination is superior to that of sildenafil alone, as reported in previous studies. Both treatment modalities are safe and well tolerated. However, approximately one-third of the patients remain unsatisfied even from the␣combination treatment. Further treatment options are needed.     

Predictors of erectile function improvement in obstructive sleep apnea patients with long-term CPAP treatment

The long-term effect of treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on erectile function was assessed in 60 patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). Severity of OSAS was evaluated by respiratory disturbance index (RDI) and minimal oxygen saturation (OxiMin). Severity of erectile dysfunction (ED) was assessed with the five question International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) before and after CPAP treatment. Subjects were categorized into three groups on the basis of the change in IIEF-5 score: Group 1, no change (n=37); Group 2, improvement from 10+/-5.65 to 19.1+/-5.7, P<0.01 (n=12); Group 3, worsening from 19.9+/-4.7 to 9.5+/-7.8, P<0.01 (n=11). Group 2 had significantly higher RDI and lower OxiMin than the other groups, and was also more compliant and satisfied with CPAP. Change in IIEF-5 with CPAP treatment was negatively correlated (Pearson coefficient) with OxiMin (r=-0.374), and positively correlated with adherence to CPAP treatment (r=0.689). In conclusion, in selected patients, CPAP treatment for OSAS may by itself have a positive effect on erectile function by improving respiration during sleep. Predictors of erectile improvement include high RDI, low OxiMin, and CPAP compliance.     

Sexual functions of men with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome and hypogonadism may improve upon testosterone administration: a pilot study

This study examined 72 patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS), confirmed by polysomnography. Thirty-two patients were suffering from erectile dysfunction (ED) assessed by IIEF-5 questionnaires and confirmed by nocturnal penile tumescence examination. Their testosterone levels were measured. Eight patients had normal testosterone levels and were treated with a PDE-5 inhibitor (vardenafil) only; after 6 months of treatment, 6 of these patients (75%) showed significant improvement in erectile function. The remaining 24 patients with OSAS, ED and hypogonadism (total testosterone <12 nmol l⁻¹), were divided into two groups based on the indication for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy: five patients received CPAP therapy (group 1) and 19 patients did not (group 2). The patients of group 2 received only a PDE-5 inhibitor (vardenafil 20 mg) for ED; and eight patients (42%) showed an improvement after 3 months of treatment. The five patients receiving CPAP therapy were treated with a combination of parenteral testosterone undecanoate and a PDE-5 inhibitor (vardenafil) and all had normal erectile function after 3 months of therapy. The results suggest positive effects of addition of testosterone to treatment with PDE-5 inhibitors in hypogonadal men with OSAS, which should be confirmed in larger controlled studies.     

持续气道正压通气对睡眠呼吸暂停综合征合并勃起功能障碍的治疗

目的 :探讨经鼻持续气道正压通气 (nCPAP)对睡眠呼吸暂停综合征 (SAS)合并勃起功能障碍 (ED)患者勃起功能的影响。　方法 :SAS合并ED患者 2 7例 ,随机分为治疗组 15例和对照组 12例 ,治疗组使用BIPAP呼吸机以nCPAP治疗 1个月 ,比较两组治疗前后睡眠呼吸暂停低通气指数 (AHI)、最低SaO2 和勃起功能国际问卷 5 (IIEF 5 )评分的变化。　结果 :两组患者治疗前AHI、最低SaO2 、勃起功能、IIEF 5评分无明显差异 ,治疗组在治疗后比治疗前、对照组均有明显改善 ,差异均有显著性 (P <0 .0 5 )。而对照组在治疗前后上述指标无明显变化 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论 :nCPAP可改善SAS合并ED患者的勃起功能。     

持续气道正压通气对阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者勃起功能障碍疗效的meta分析

目的:评价持续气道正压通气(CPAP)对阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征(OSAS)患者勃起功能障碍(ED)的影响。方法:计算机检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、中国学术期刊全文数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、万方资源数据库和中国重要会议论文全文数据库并手工检索相关期刊,全面收集CPAP对OSAS合并性功能障碍的临床研究,按照纳入、排除标准选择实验研究并评价质量,而后提取有效数据进行meta分析。结果:最终纳入4篇文献,1篇中文,3篇英文,包括77例患者。meta分析结果显示各研究间无统计学异质性(P=0.80;I2=0%),故采用固定效应模型进行meta分析。结果显示经CPAP治疗后,IIEF-5增高[WMD=4.19,95%(3.01,5.36),P<0.001]。结论:现有临床研究证据显示,对于OSAS合并ED患者,CPAP治疗能明显减轻ED。但因研究质量及研究样本存在明显局限性,期待更多高质量、大规模的临床随机对照研究加以验证。     

A comparative, crossover study of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with evidence of arteriogenic erectile dysfunction

The aim of the study was to establish and compare the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with arteriogenic erectile dysfunction (ED). In all, 43 men with ED and postinjection max penile systolic velocity <25 cm/s in repeated Doppler ultrasonography were included. Of these, 24 men started on apomorphine 2 mg and 19 on sildenafil 50 mg, the doses titrated up to 3 and 100 mg according to effectiveness and tolerability. Safety was evaluated according to adverse events (AEs) and patient withdrawal. Efficacy was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse, based on event log data. The incidence of AEs with apomorphine 3 mg was higher than with sildenafil 100 mg. Two men on apomorphine 3 mg discontinued treatment due to AEs. The overall success rate of sildenafil was 63.7% compared to 32.1% of apomorphine (Pearson chi(2), P<0.01). Of all men, 25 (58.1%) responded to sildenafil 50 mg without the need for dose increase, while only one responded to apomorphine 2 mg. The response to sildenafil 50 mg was age related (analysis of variance, p=0.04). Satisfaction was reported by 76.75 and 13.95% of patients for sildenafil and apomorphine, respectively, but 20.9% were not satisfied with any of the two drugs. In conclusion, this study provides clear evidence that sildenafil, even at 50 mg dose, is more effective than apomorphine 3 mg in men with arteriogenic ED. The fact that one out of five patients is not satisfied with the above-studied drugs shows that new oral agents need to be evaluated for the treatment of this disorder.     

Efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in men in Egypt and South Africa

The efficacy of sildenafil citrate (Viagra), an oral agent for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), has been demonstrated in global studies. This 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, flexible-dose study assessed the efficacy and safety of sildenafil to treat ED in men in Egypt and South Africa. Men with ED of varied etiology were randomized to receive sildenafil 50 mg (n=128) or placebo (n=126); doses could be adjusted to 100 or 25 mg. Questions from the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) assessing the ability to achieve (Q3) and maintain (Q4) erections demonstrated a significant improvement with sildenafil compared with placebo (P<0.0001). Improved erections were reported by 74% of patients receiving sildenafil and 27% of those receiving placebo (P<0.0001). Headache, dyspepsia, and flushing were the most common adverse events in sildenafil-treated patients. These results are consistent with clinical trials in other countries. We conclude that sildenafil is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for men with ED in Egypt and South Africa.     

Long-term efficacy and safety of oral Viagra (sildenafil citrate) in men with erectile dysfunction and the effect of randomised treatment withdrawal

The long-term efficacy and safety of oral Viagra (sildenafil citrate), a selective phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, and the effect of withdrawing treatment were evaluated in men with erectile dysfunction (ED). In 233 men with ED of psychogenic or mixed organic/psychogenic aetiology, 16 weeks of open-label, flexible-dose sildenafil treatment (10-100 mg) was followed by eight weeks of double-blind, fixed-dose, randomised withdrawal to placebo or continued treatment with sildenafil. Sildenafil was taken as needed (not more than once daily) approximately 1 h prior to sexual activity. The main outcome measures were a global efficacy question, a sexual function questionnaire, an event log of erections, and adverse event recording. In the open-label phase, 200 of 216 patients (93%) reported improved erections with sildenafil; 28 patients (12%) discontinued treatment. In the double-blind phase, the significant improvements in the frequency and duration of erections were maintained in the sildenafil group but returned to pre-treatment values in patients on placebo (P values < 0.0001 versus placebo). The most frequent adverse events in the sildenafil group during the double-blind phase were flushing (7%), headache (6%), and dyspepsia (5%). Of the 192 patients enrolled in the 1-y extension, 90% completed the study; only two patients (1%) were withdrawn due to lack of efficacy. In men with ED of psychogenic or mixed aetiology, oral sildenafil is effective and well-tolerated both at the initiation of therapy and during long-term treatment. For most patients, sildenafil treatment must be continued for improvements in erectile function to be maintained.     

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose oral sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction of various etiologies

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose oral sildenafil in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) of various etiologies. METHODS: In a 12-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose study, 514 men (mean age 56 years) with ED were randomized to receive 25, 50, or 100 mg of sildenafil or placebo. The primary etiology of ED was determined to be organic in 32% of men, psychogenic in 25%, or mixed in 43%. Sildenafil or placebo was taken in the home setting approximately 1 hour before sexual activity, not more than once daily. Efficacy was determined by responses to question 3 (ability to achieve an erection) and question 4 (ability to maintain an erection) of the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Other measures of efficacy included the five sexual function domains of the IIEF, a global efficacy question, event log data, and a partner questionnaire. RESULTS: Sildenafil significantly increased patients' ability to achieve and maintain erections (P <0.0001), with efficacy increasing with increasing dose. Significant improvements were also observed in the IIEF domains for erectile function, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction, and overall sexual satisfaction (P <0.0001). The proportion of subjects who felt that treatment with sildenafil improved their erections was significantly greater (67% to 86%) than that with placebo treatment (24%, P <0.0001). The proportion of successful attempts at sexual intercourse also increased significantly with sildenafil treatment (P <0.001). Partner responses corroborated patient reports. Sildenafil was well tolerated at the three doses studied. CONCLUSIONS: Oral sildenafil is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for ED of various etiologies.     

Therapeutic effectiveness and patient satisfaction after 6 months of treatment with tadalafil, sildenafil, and vardenafil: results from the erectile dysfunction observational study (EDOS)

OBJECTIVE: This observational study was conducted across Europe to assess health outcomes in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) who took tadalafil, sildenafil citrate (sildenafil), or vardenafil HCl (vardenafil) for 6 mo. METHODS: Therapy effectiveness and patient satisfaction were evaluated using established and new questions on erectile function. Behavioural, psychological, and relationship outcomes were assessed using the short form of the Psychological and Interpersonal Relationship Scales (SF-PAIRS). RESULTS: In nine European countries at 904 sites, 8047 patients were enrolled and 94% (7560) selected either tadalafil (5315), sildenafil (1252), or vardenafil (993) for treatment at baseline. Of the 7560, 3998 (52.9%) took the same drug for 6 mo. Baseline characteristics across the three treatment groups were comparable: mean age approximately 56 yr, moderate or severe ED, and mean International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain score about 13. Tadalafil, sildenafil, and vardenafil were therapeutically effective and improved patient satisfaction in the 40-58% of men who completed 6 mo of a single therapy. Patients taking tadalafil consistently had numerically higher levels of therapeutic effectiveness and satisfaction compared with patients who took sildenafil or vardenafil. The three cohorts had statistically significant changes from baseline in response to SF-PAIRS and there were significant differences, in favour of tadalafil, among cohorts in the Time Concerns domain. CONCLUSION: In a large observational study that mimics a routine clinical setting, most patients selected an inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 5 to treat ED, which resulted in a high level of therapeutic effectiveness and patient satisfaction.     

Sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in the treatment of men with erectile dysfunction in southern Latin America: a double-blind,randomized, placebo-controlled,parallel-group,multicenter, flexible-dose escalation study

Our objectives were: (1) to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) administered to men with broad-spectrum erectile dysfunction (ED) in southern Latin America; and (2) to correlate Rigiscan measurements assessing ED etiology with the investigator's assessment. A total of 141 men with broad-spectrum ED (mean age 57) were enrolled in a randomized, 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose escalation study of sildenafil. After the 12-week treatment period, the mean score for the primary efficacy variables had risen significantly: for the sildenafil group, 66.2% from baseline for question 3 of the International Index of Erectile Function and 77.6% for question 4, vs 15.1% and 21.2% for the placebo group, respectively (P<0.0001). Rigiscan data confirmed investigator assessments of etiology. Headache and flushing, usually mild and transient, were the most common adverse events. Sildenafil was an effective, well-tolerated treatment for men in southern Latin America with broad-spectrum ED.     

A dose-escalation study to assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in men with erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate (Viagra, Pfizer Inc., USA) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study over a period of 26 weeks in men with erectile dysfunction of a broad spectrum of aetiology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 315 patients from five countries were randomized to receive treatment with placebo (156 men) or sildenafil (159 men). Significant concomitant medical conditions were hypertension (20%), a history of pelvic surgery (19%), diabetes mellitus (15%), and ischaemic heart disease (10%). Patients randomized to treatment received a starting dose of 25 mg of sildenafil or matching placebo, which could be increased to 50 mg and then to 100 mg of sildenafil, based on efficacy and tolerability. Assessments of efficacy comprised the 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), including question three (ability to achieve an erection) and question four (ability to maintain an erection), a partner questionnaire, an overall efficacy question, and event-log data. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of treatment, 26%, 32% and 42% of patients were taking 25, 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil, respectively. A similar distribution of doses was reported after 26 weeks of treatment. Treatment with sildenafil significantly improved the patients' abilities to achieve and maintain an erection compared with treatment with placebo (P < 0.001). Scores for four of the five sexual function domains of the IIEF (erectile function, orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction) also improved significantly (P < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in the mean score for the erectile function domain, regardless of the aetiology of erectile dysfunction (P < 0.001). After 12 weeks and 26 weeks of treatment, 82% and 79% of patients receiving sildenafil reported improved erections, compared with 24% and 23% of patients receiving placebo, respectively (P < 0.001). Treatment-related adverse events were mild to moderate and occurred in 27% of patients receiving sildenafil, compared with 8% of patients receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for men with erectile dysfunction of a broad spectrum of aetiology.     

Efficacy of apomorphine and sildenafil in men with nonarteriogenic erectile dysfunction. A comparative crossover study

To compare the efficacy of apomorphine and sildenafil in men with nonarteriogenic erectile dysfunction (ED), 40 men were studied. Post-injection penile peak systolic velocity was greater than 25 cm s(-1). Twenty men started on apomorphine 2 mg and 20 on sildenafil 50 mg, the doses titrated up to 3 and 100 mg, respectively, if necessary. After a 1-week washout period each group switched to the other treatment mode. Efficacy was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse, based on an event log data. The majority (85%) of the men had concomitant diseases, risk factors for ED and 95% were heavy smokers. The overall success rate of apomorphine was 62.7%, compared with 73.1% of sildenafil (Yates-corrected chi-square, P < 0.0004). The response to apomorphine 2 mg and sildenafil 50 mg was age related. Sildenafil was statistically more effective than apomorphine in impotent men with normal penile Doppler. Given the contraindication of sildenafil in men taking nitrates and the quick time of action of apomorphine, the two drugs are satisfactory first line therapeutic tools in such individuals and the choice should be based on patient's needs and preferences.     

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.     

Sildenafil reduces bother associated with erectile dysfunction: pooled analysis of five randomized, double-blind trials

Improvement in bother associated with erectile dysfunction (ED) is an important aspect of successful treatment of ED. Changes in erectile function and the bother associated with ED were assessed in this analysis of pooled data from five 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose studies of sildenafil. Men who received sildenafil (n=578, vs placebo, n=550) had significantly greater (least squares mean+/-s.e.) improvement in erectile function (EF) domain scores of the international index of erectile function (IIEF) (10.0+/-0.3 vs 1.0+/-0.3, P<0.0001) and in erection distress scale (EDS) total transformed score (18.8+/-0.8 vs 4.8+/-0.9, P<0.0001). Scores on individual questions of the EDS were 24-65% higher after treatment with sildenafil (vs 8-12%, for placebo). The change in EF domain score correlated positively with the change in total transformed EDS score (0.43, P<0.0001). Successful treatment of ED with sildenafil may reduce the bother associated with ED.     

An open-label, randomized, flexible-dose, crossover study to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate and apomorphine hydrochloride in men with erectile dysfunction

Two papers in this section deal with well‐known pharmacological agents used to treat male erectile dysfunction. In the first of these, authors from the UK compared the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in such patients. This open‐label crossover trial suggested that sildenafil was better than apomorphine, where the primary endpoint was the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function. The second paper is an update on the efficacy and safety of tadalafil. It describes the results of its use in a large number of men with erectile dysfunction, compared to placebo. Once again, the erectile function domain was one of the primary endpoints. Tadalafil was an effective and well tolerated treatment for this condition.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in the treatment of men with erectile dysfunction (ED).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 139 men with ED who were naïve to treatment were entered into an open‐label crossover trial with two treatment periods, each of 8 weeks, separated by a 2‐week washout period. Men were randomized to receive either sildenafil then apomorphine or apomorphine then sildenafil, and were allowed to titrate the dose on both drugs. The primary endpoint was the erectile function (EF) domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and other endpoints included diary data, the other domains of the IIEF, overall assessment questions and the Erectile Dysfunction Index of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

The EF domain score after treatment was 25.2 for sildenafil and 15.9 for apomorphine. The treatment difference of the adjusted means was 9.3 points (95% confidence interval 7.6–11.1; P < 0.001). After sildenafil the successful intercourse rate was 75%, vs 35% for apomorphine (P < 0.001), and the EDITS scores were 82.5 for sildenafil and 46.8 for apomorphine (P < 0.001). Of the men, 96% expressed a preference for sildenafil as a treatment for their ED. The side‐effect profiles for both drugs were in keeping with published data.

CONCLUSION

By all measurable endpoints sildenafil was superior to apomorphine in this open‐label crossover study of men with ED who were naïve to therapy

     

Is sildenafil failure in men after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) due to arterial disease? Penile duplex Doppler findings in 174 men after RRP

Sildenafil is frequently the first-line treatment for post-radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) erectile dysfunction (ED) with maximum treatment satisfaction rates of 43%-80%. The etiology of erectile dysfunction after RRP has been attributed to psychogenic, vascular, veno- occlusive or nerve injury causes. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the penile duplex Doppler arterial parameters in men with ED after RRP who failed sildenafil. The purpose was to assess whether sildenafil failure after RRP is associated with underlying corporal arterial disease. A total of 174 consecutive men presenting with sildenafil refractory ED after nerve-sparing RRP underwent color duplex penile Doppler evaluation with vasoactive injection. Mean age was 59.6 y and mean time from surgery was 11.6 months. Some 81% (141/174) of the men had no pre-operative ED (PED). Significant differences in penile duplex Doppler parameters for arterial disease were seen between men with and without PED. In men without PED, 19% (27/141) manifested arterial insufficiency. However, in men with PED, 50% (16/33) demonstrated arterial disease. Nerve sparing status did not affect the presence of arterial disease. Sildenafil refractory erectile dysfunction after RRP in men without PED is not predominantly associated with penile Doppler parameters consistent with arterial insufficiency.     

Efficacy and safety of oral sildenafil in men with erectile dysfunction and spinal cord injury

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of sildenafil in men with spinal cord injury (SCI) and erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: Seventeen men with SCI were selected from February to September 1998 for sildenafil treatment of ED. The initial dose of 25 mg was increased by 25-mg increments as needed. Patients underwent baseline physical examination and answered questions from the abridged International Index of Erectile Function before and during therapy. RESULTS: Sixteen patients tolerated therapy; 1 developed hypotension and discontinued therapy. There was significant improvement in erectile function (P < .05) after 5.3 +/- 2.2 months when compared with baseline or previous therapies (P < .05). Of the 17 patients, 94% recommended sildenafil to others. Six of these 16 patients were available for long-term follow-up. There was further significant improvement in quality of erection (P < .05), but no change in satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil is effective and well tolerated in men with SCI and ED.