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.     

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.     

Sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in erectile dysfunction: near normalization in men with broad-spectrum erectile dysfunction compared with age-matched healthy control subjects

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of sildenafil in men with broad-spectrum erectile dysfunction (ED), with reference to age-matched healthy control subjects. METHODS: One hundred eleven patients were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 12-week, flexible-dose study. Efficacy assessments included the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), a global assessment question, and patient event log data. In a separate, nontreatment study, 109 control subjects also completed the IIEF. RESULTS: Mean IIEF scores at baseline were significantly lower for patients with ED than for control subjects without a history of ED. After treatment, mean IIEF scores for patients receiving sildenafil approached values observed in control subjects and were significantly higher than mean scores for patients receiving placebo (P<0.01). Responses to the global assessment question and patient log data corroborated the IIEF results. Sildenafil was well tolerated, with no discontinuations because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that sildenafil, an effective oral therapy for the treatment of broad-spectrum ED, is associated with a near normalization of patient erectile function.     

Erectile dysfunction in men with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a randomized study of the efficacy of sildenafil and continuous positive airway pressure

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of sildenafil and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). In all, 30 men were randomly treated for 12 weeks either with sildenafil 100 mg before intercourse (15 men) or CPAP during night time sleep (15 men). Under sildenafil, 97/180 (53.9%) of attempted intercourses were successful compared to 33/138 (23.9%) under CPAP. The mean IIEF (erectile function domain score) was 12.9 and 9.3 after sildenafil and CPAP treatment, respectively (P=0.007), compared to 7.9 and 7 at baseline. In all, 53.3% of patients were satisfied with sildenafil and 20% with CPAP for ED treatment (P=0.058). Although sildenafil was superior to CPAP, comorbidities and OSAS per se possibly resulted in a lower effectiveness of sildenafil compared to that in the general population of ED men. While about half of the patients were not satisfied even with the more effective treatment, we conclude that a combination of the two therapeutic tools or a different therapeutic mode should be studied further.     

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.     

Erectile response with vardenafil in sildenafil nonresponders: a multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled erectile dysfunction clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of vardenafil in patients previously unresponsive to sildenafil. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, 12-week, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled trial was conducted, involving 463 men aged > or = 18 years with moderate-to-severe erectile dysfunction (ED) and who were unresponsive to sildenafil (by history). After a 4-week treatment-free run-in, patients received placebo or vardenafil 10 mg with the option to maintain current dose or to titrate by one dose level (5, 10 or 20 mg) based on efficacy and tolerability at 4 and 8 weeks. Outcome measures were the erectile function (EF) domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function, two Sexual Encounter Profile diary questions (vaginal penetration and maintenance of erection until successful completion of intercourse), and the Global Assessment Question (GAQ). RESULTS: There was significantly better EF with vardenafil than with placebo throughout the study. The least-square mean EF domain scores increased from 9.3 at baseline to 17.6 at the 'last' observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis with vardenafil (P < 0.001). Overall least-square mean per-patient success rates more than doubled for penetration (30.3% to 62.3%) and quadrupled for successful intercourse (10.5% to 46.1%) with vardenafil. Improved erections (positive response to the GAQ) were reported by 61.8% of patients receiving vardenafil and 14.7% of those receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Normal EF (domain score > or = 26) was achieved by 30% of patients receiving vardenafil and 6% receiving placebo at LOCF (P < 0.001). Adverse events were infrequent and representative of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor profile. CONCLUSION: Vardenafil is an effective and generally safe treatment for ED, even in men unresponsive to sildenafil (by history).     

Erectile dysfunction and the effects of sildenafil treatment in patients on haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Sexual dysfunction, including erectile dysfunction, is common in patients with uraemia. Despite successful treatment of male sexual dysfunction with sildenafil in non-uraemic population, its efficacy in dialysis patients is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, 35 male HD patients (mean age 48+/-12 years) and 15 male CAPD patients (mean age 44+/-12 years) were included. In the baseline period, haemoglobin, serum urea, and albumin, Kt/V, several hormonal parameters, Beck depression scale, and penile Doppler blood flow, (peak systolic velocity after intracavernous papaverine administration) were measured. The international index of erectile function (IIEF) form was used to evaluate erectile dysfunction. Sildenafil was given to patients with erectile dysfunction at a dose of 50-100 mg/day twice a week. RESULTS: The percentage of erectile dysfunction was similar between patients on HD (71%) and those on CAPD (80%). Patients with erectile dysfunction were significantly older and had lower free-testosterone serum levels and penile blood flow than those without. In linear regression analysis for baseline IIEF score, penile blood flow was the only independent variable associated with erectile dysfunction. IIEF score increased to a similar extent after sildenafil treatment in both HD patients (from 8.10+/-5.54 to 21.70+/-9.61, P<0.001) and CAPD patients (from 9.90+/-3.87 to 21.60+/-10.18, P=0.011). Changes in IIEF scores after sildenafil treatment were associated with baseline penile blood flow as an independent variable by linear regression analysis. Adverse events observed during sildenafil treatment were dyspepsia in two patients and headache in one patient. CONCLUSION: The rate of erectile dysfunction is high in dialysis patients. Penile blood flow is the most important factor for predicting both the development of erectile dysfunction and the response to sildenafil therapy in such patients. Oral sildenafil is an effective, reliable, well-tolerated treatment for uraemic patients with erectile dysfunction.     

The utility of sildenafil citrate for infertile men with sexual dysfunction: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use the sildenafil citrate, recognized as a first-line therapy for men with erectile dysfunction (ED), and which is safe and effective in men with various causes and severity of ED, including psychogenic ED, in a population of infertile men with sexual dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Infertility is a major source of life stress and might be associated with sexual dysfunction through the erosion of self-esteem and self-confidence, and in stimulating discord in a relationship. Men presenting for evaluation of fertility who on questioning by the physician reported the recent onset of sexual dysfunction, had a history taken, a physical examination, hormonal profile, and completed the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), a validated inventory for assessing sexual dysfunction. Thirty men with a score of <26 on the erectile function domain of the IIEF, or who complained of new onset rapid or delayed ejaculation, were treated with sildenafil with no randomization or placebo control. The evaluation was repeated and the IIEF completed again > or =3 months after starting treatment. RESULTS: For men complaining of ED, subjective erectile rigidity, duration of erection, and the percentage of successful penetration attempts significantly improved with sildenafil. The mean (sd) IIEF domain scores for erection and satisfaction, at 18 (4) vs 27 (3), and 12 (2) vs 16 (3) (both P = 0.01), and orgasm, at 4 (1) vs 6 (3) (P = 0.001), respectively, significantly improved after treatment. In patients with ejaculatory dysfunction, the function improved in 64% after sildenafil therapy. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the nature of sexual dysfunction associated with male-factor infertility, and showed the efficacy of sildenafil therapy in men with this condition.     

A baseline-controlled,open-label,flexible dose-escalation study to assess the safety and efficacy of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in patients with erectile dysfunction

Although sildenafil citrate (Viagra) has demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), the dosing regimens often used in clinical trials may not always match those employed in clinical practice. This study was undertaken to further assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil taken as required in male outpatients 18 years of age and older with ED (n=71). It was conducted as a placebo-baseline-controlled, open-label, flexible dose-escalation study, with sildenafil (25,50, or 100 mg) administered for 8 weeks following a 4-week placebo run-in. Efficacy variables included questions 3 and 4 of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), other IIEF domains, patient event logs, and quality-of-life (QOL) assessments. Treatment with sildenafil resulted in improvements from baseline in all IIEF domains analyzed (all P<0.0001), as well as overall QOL and amelioration of specific sexual and social relationships (all P&<0.0001). Sildenafil was well tolerated. One participant discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Results suggest that flexible dosing with oral sildenafil is safe and has beneficial effects on all indices of erectile function and QOL.     

The effect of sildenafil citrate and pentoxifylline combined treatment in the management of erectile dysfunction

Introduction In the present study, we evaluated the efficacy of sildenafil and pentoxifylline combined therapy in the treatment of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction. Methods Sixty-eight patients with various degrees and types of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction were included in the study. The patients were recommended to take oral sildenafil (minimum two 50-mg tablets/week) 1 h prior to sexual intercourse for 4 weeks. After 4 weeks of washout period, patients were recommended to take combined therapy (minimum two 50-mg tablets/week sildenafil 1 h prior to sexual intercourse and 1.2 g of pentoxifylline/day divided into three doses) for an additional 4-week period. Both treatment regimes were evaluated with the international index of erectile function (IIEF). Results Mean IIEF score was higher after sildenafil treatment when compared to pre-treatment score (14.2 ± 4.3 and 8.6 ± 4.2, respectively, P < 0.05). Likewise after the combination treatment, mean IIEF score was higher when compared to pre-treatment score (18.1 ± 5.2 and 8.6 ± 3.8, respectively, P < 0.05). The increase in the IIEF score was 5.62 ± 2.08 in the sildenafil only group whereas increase in the IIEF score was 9.51 ± 3.77 in the combination therapy group. There was a statistically significant increase in the combination group when compared to the sildenafil only group (P < 0.001). Conclusion Our study suggests that use of sildenafil citrate and pentoxifylline combined therapy could be effective in the management of patients with vasculogenic erectile dysfunction.     

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.     

Efficacy, tolerability and satisfaction with sildenafil citrate 100-mg titration compared with continued 50-mg dose treatment in men with erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and treatment satisfaction after initiating treatment with sildenafil 50 mg and later titrating to 100 mg, compared with continuing treatment with sildenafil 50 mg, in men with erectile dysfunction (ED).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicentre, parallel‐group trial was conducted in two 4‐week periods. In period 1, patients received 50‐mg doses of sildenafil single‐blinded for 4 weeks. In period 2, patients were randomized to double‐blind, placebo‐controlled treatment with sildenafil 50 mg or sildenafil 100 mg for 4 weeks. All patients were aged ≥18 years with a documented clinical diagnosis of ED (score of ≤25 on the International Index of Erectile Function, IIEF, Erectile Function, EF, domain), and met the prescribing criteria for sildenafil 50 mg and 100 mg.

RESULTS

Of 492 enrolled patients (mean age 53 years, sd 11), 476 (97%) completed period 1 and 473 (96%) completed period 2. Patients receiving sildenafil 50 mg in period 1 had an increase in the mean (sd ) baseline EF domain score from 12.8 (5.2) to 22.5 (6.6) (P < 0.001), and improved scores on the Quality of Erection Questionnaire (QEQ) and Sexual Experience Questionnaire (SEX‐Q). The IIEF EF domain scores were similar in the two groups at baseline and randomization. Patients titrated to the 100‐mg dose (237 men) showed a significantly greater improvement than those who continued on the 50‐mg dose (240; P < 0.001). There was a significant increase in QEQ and SEX‐Q scores in patients titrated to sildenafil 100 mg compared with patients continuing at sildenafil 50 mg. At either sildenafil dose, headache, flushing and hot flushes were the most common adverse events. Neither the frequency nor the severity of adverse events increased with titration to sildenafil 100 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

After initial treatment with sildenafil 50 mg, patients titrated to 100 mg showed further increases in efficacy and satisfaction with no increase in the number or severity of adverse events than in those remaining on the starting dose.     

Combined use of androgen and sildenafil for hypogonadal patients unresponsive to sildenafil alone

To investigate the therapeutic effect of androgen on hypogonadal patients unresponsive to sildenafil alone. In total, 32 hypogonadal patients with erectile dysfunction (ED), initially had an inadequate response to sildenafil (100 mg). Oral testosterone undecanoate (Restandol, 80 mg, bid or tid) alone was supplied for 2 months, and if patients could not achieve a satisfactory erection, combined use of testosterone and sildenafil was continued thereafter. Total testosterone (TT), free testosterone (FT), and the parameters of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and uroflow rate (UFR) were assessed. Eleven patients (34.3%) achieved satisfactory erectile function after testosterone replacement only. Another 12 (37.5%) patients experienced satisfactory intercourse after combined therapy. Serum TT and FT levels significantly increased after the use of testosterone alone (415+/-163 vs 220+/-101 ng/dl, P<0.01; 10.4+/-4.6 vs 5.1+/-1.9 ng/dl; P<0.01, respectively) and the combined use of testosterone and sildenafil (498+/-178 vs 220+/-101 ng/dl, P<0.01; 11.7+/-4.6 vs 5.1+/-1.9 ng/dl, P<0.001, respectively); as did the IIEF score (14.8+/-6.8 vs 12.6+/-7.5, P<0.01, 17.5+/-5.2 vs 12.6+/-7.5, P<0.001, respectively). However, no statistical differences were demonstrated for IPSS or UFR. In conclusions, one-third of hypogonadal patients with ED who failed to respond to sildenafil, responded to testosterone alone, another third responded to sildenafil again after normalization of testosterone. So, in hypogonadal patients with ED, androgen supplementation is first-line therapy. If patients are unresponsive to androgen alone or sildenafil alone, combined use may improve erectile function and enhance the therapeutic effect of PDE-5 inhibitors.     

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.     

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in the geriatric population

OBJECTIVE: To define the efficacy and tolerability of sildenafil in elderly men, as epidemiological data show an increasing life-expectancy of the population, and age is not only correlated with increasing morbidity but also an increase in the prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED), for which sildenafil, available for >8 years, is effective and safe across a wide variety of medical comorbidities, severity and causes of ED. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A database was generated from all sildenafil users in one sexual medicine practice, and data were extracted for men aged >60 years. The database included data on patient demographics, comorbidities, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) scores and adverse events (AEs). The patients were subdivided into those aged 60-69 (group 1), 70-79 (group 2), and > or = 80 years (group 3). Analysis of variance was used to assess differences among the three groups for several variables of demographics and erectile response. RESULTS: In all, 167 patients were analysed; there were no significant differences in the duration of ED (5 +/- 3 years) or presence of comorbidities among the three groups. With a mean of two risk factors, the overall incidence of comorbidities was hypertension in 37%, dyslipidaemia in 28%, diabetes in 26%, coronary artery disease in 18% and lower urinary tract symptoms in 46%. The efficacy data showed that overall, 54% of men responded to sildenafil, with a mean increase in IIEF EF domain score of 5.7. Within the three groups there was a significant age-related decrease in response rate and IIEF EF domain score with age. However, there was no difference in AE incidence among the three groups, with an overall profile of 18% headache, 8% flushing, 8% dyspepsia, 5% nasal congestion and 2% visual changes. No overt cardiovascular events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: From these data, sildenafil is an effective agent in elderly men, but had a lower efficacy rate with increasing age, especially in men aged >80 years. The incidence of side-effects was similar to that in the general population taking sildenafil, with no difference in AEs among the different age groups.     

Randomized study of testosterone gel as adjunctive therapy to sildenafil in hypogonadal men with erectile dysfunction who do not respond to sildenafil alone

PURPOSE: We compare the efficacy of testosterone gel (T-gel) versus placebo as adjunctive therapy to sildenafil in hypogonadal men with erectile dysfunction who do not respond to sildenafil alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind, parallel group, multicenter study was performed. A total of 75 hypogonadal men (18 to 80 years old, morning serum total testosterone 400 ng/dl or less) with confirmed lack of response to sildenafil monotherapy were randomized (1:1) to receive a daily dose of 1% T-gel or 5 gm placebo gel as adjunctive therapy to 100 mg sildenafil during a 12-week period. Subjects were evaluated for sexual function, primarily based on the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), quality of life and serum testosterone levels at baseline and weeks 4, 8 and 12. RESULTS: Testosterone treated subjects had greater improvement in erectile function compared to those who received placebo, reaching statistical significance at week 4 (4.4 vs 2.1, p = 0.029, 95.1% CI 0.3, 4.7). Similar trends were observed for improvements in orgasmic function, overall satisfaction, total IIEF score and percentage of IIEF responders. T-gel significantly (p < or =0.004) increased total and free testosterone levels throughout the study, although no significant correlations were made between testosterone levels and the IIEF at end point. CONCLUSIONS: T-gel taken with sildenafil may be beneficial in improving erectile function in hypogonadal men with erectile dysfunction who are unresponsive to sildenafil alone.     

Efficacy and safety of long‐term tadalafil 5 mg once daily combined with sildenafil 50 mg as needed at the early stage of treatment for patients with erectile dysfunction

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long‐term and low‐dose tadalafil combined with sildenafil as needed at the early stage of treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). We enrolled 180 patients with ED 1 : 1 to tadalafil 5 mg once daily or once‐a‐day tadalafil 5 mg combined with sildenafil 50 mg as needed. The efficacy measures included the 5‐item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF‐5) and the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP). The safety was assessed by observing drug tolerability and adverse events. Total IIEF‐5 scores of patients with severe ED in combined medication group were significantly higher than in tadalafil alone group. Question 2 scores of IIEF‐5 of patients with moderate and severe ED in combined medication group were significantly higher than in tadalafil alone group. The significant improvement in question 3 scores of IIEF‐5 existed only in patients with severe ED receiving combined medication. The percentage of ‘yes’ responses to SEP4, SEP5 and partner's SEP3 were improved significantly in combined medication group. There was no difference between two groups in the incidence of adverse events. Our results suggest that combined medication can better improve erectile function, especially for patients with severe ED.     

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,multicenter, randomized,crossover study comparing sildenafil citrate and tadalafil for treating erectile dysfunction in Chinese men na?ve to phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor therapy

The study was to compare treatment preference, efficacy, and tolerability of sildenafil citrate (sildenafil) and tadalafil for treating erectile dysfunction (ED) in Chinese men naïve to phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitor therapies. This multicenter, randomized, open-label, crossover study evaluated whether Chinese men with ED preferred 20-mg tadalafil or 100-mg sildenafil. After a 4 weeks baseline assessment, 383 eligible patients were randomized to sequential 20-mg tadalafil per 100-mg sildenafil or vice versa for 8 weeks respectively and then chose which treatment they preferred to take during the 8 weeks extension. Primary efficacy was measured by Question 1 of the PDE5 Inhibitor Treatment Preference Questionnaire (PITPQ). Secondary efficacy was analyzed by PITPQ Question 2, the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) erectile function (EF) domain, sexual encounter profile (SEP) Questions 2 and 3, and the Drug Attributes Questionnaire. Three hundred and fifty men (91%) completed the randomized treatment phase. Two hundred and forty-two per 350 (69.1%) patients preferred 20-mg tadalafil, and 108/350 (30.9%) preferred 100-mg sildenafil (P < 0.001) as their treatment in the 8 weeks extension. Ninety-two per 242 (38%) patients strongly preferred tadalafil and 37/108 (34.3%) strongly the preferred sildenafil. The SEP2 (penetration), SEP3 (successful intercourse), and IIEF-EF domain scores were improved in both tadalafil and sildenafil treatment groups. For patients who preferred tadalafil, getting an erection long after taking the medication was the most reported reason for tadalafil preference. The only treatment-emergent adverse event reported by > 2% of men was headache. After tadalafil and sildenafil treatments, more Chinese men with ED naïve to PDE5 inhibitor preferred tadalafil. Both sildenafil and tadalafil treatments were effective and safe.     

Efficacy of sildenafil in erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy

Radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) is an important cause of iatrogenic erectile dysfunction (ED). While sildenafil has been widely used since its introduction as a new treatment option for ED, its efficacy in post-RRP patients has not been extensively studied. We retrospectively compared the efficacy of sildenafil in post-RRP and non-surgical patients with ED (NSED) using a subset of questions from the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and correlated results with their specific etiology of ED based on penile blood flow study (PBFS). A brief questionnaire regarding satisfaction with sildenafil was administered to 72 consecutive post-RRP patients (nerve sparing status unknown) and 32 consecutive NSED patients who had previously undergone PBFS with pharmacotesting as part of their evaluation for ED. PBFS diagnoses were arterial insufficiency (AI) for peak systolic velocity (PSV) < 25 cm/sec; venogenic (CVOD) for PSV > or = 35 cm/sec, mixed vascular for PV > 25 but < 35 cm/sec and resistive index (RI) < 0.9; a vascular normal diagnosis (neurogenic impotence) required excellent rigidity sustained for 20 min. Differences in the IIEF subscores for the different groups of patients were assessed. Success with sildenafil was defined as moderate or excellent improvement (3/4 or 4/4) with ability for penetration. No differences were found among the different subgroups of RRP patients with respect to IIEF scores or success rates with sildenafil. NSED patients had both significantly higher post-treatment IIEF scores (3.6/3.4 vs 2.5/2.2; t=4.50, P<0.0001) and success rates (63% vs 31%; t=3.11, P < 0.01) with sildenafil treatment than RRP patients. We found that sildenafil is significantly less effective in impotent RRP patients than in age-matched patients with ED (31% vs 63%). We had postulated that sildenafil would be least effective among RRP patients with excellent sustained rigidity to PGE1, as this subgroup is likely to have neurogenic impotence. We found that sildenafil response rates among subgroups of RRP patients were statistically similar regardless of PBFS diagnosis. IIEF scores for the RRP subgroups were similar but statistically lower than in men with ED and no history of RRP. While individuals with normal vascular responses to PGE1 have an increased likelihood of having neurogenic impotence, in RRP patients, we were unable to demonstrate any difference in efficacy of sildenafil, regardless of the PBFS diagnosis.