前列腺素E1与西地那非治疗ED的比较

目的：比较口服西地那非与阴茎海绵体内注射前列腺素E1（PGE1）治疗勃起功能障碍（ED）的疗效。方法：54例ED病人随机分为两组，A组口服西地那非，B组行海绵体内注射PGE1，均治疗4－9个月，平均6个月，结果：A、B两组的有效率分别为80．0％和83．3％，两者差异无显著性（P＞0．05），A组6例无效病人经海绵体内注射PGE1治疗，2例获得满意勃起，而B组4例无效病人经口服西地那非治疗，无1例勃起，结论：口服西地那非与海绵体内注射PEG1对各种病因所致的ED均有良好的治疗作用。对西地那非治疗无效者，可试用海绵体内注射PEG1，有时也能获得满意的效果。     

西地那非与前列腺素E1治疗勃起功能障碍的疗效比较

目的：比较口服西地那非与阴茎海绵体内注射前列腺素E1（PGE1）治疗勃起功能障碍（ED）的疗效。方法：54例ED患者随机分成两组，一组采用口服西地那非治疗（A组），另一组行海绵体内注射PGE1（B组）。治疗4－9个月，平均6个月。结果：A、B两组的有效率分别为80.0%和83.3%，二者之间差异无显著性意义（P＞0.05)。A组6例无效患者经海绵体内注射PGE1治疗，其中2例获得了勃起满意的疗效，而B组4例无效患者经口服西地那非治疗，无一例有效。结论：口服西地那非与海绵体内注射PGE1对各种病因所致的ED均有良好的治疗作用，对某些西地那非治疗无效者，可试用海绵体内注射PGE1，有时也能获得满意的效果。     

海绵体内注射亚甲蓝治疗阴茎异常勃起

20 0 1年 3月～ 2 0 0 2年 6月 ,我们采用海绵体内注射亚甲蓝治疗因注射罂粟碱等血管活性药物而导致的阴茎异常勃起病人 5例 ,疗效满意 ,报告如下。1　资料和方法1.1　临床资料　本组病人 5例 ,年龄 2 9～ 4 8岁 ,平均 4 2 .5岁 ,均因治疗勃起功能障碍 (erectiledisfunc tion ,ED)行阴茎海绵体注射罂粟碱 +酚妥拉明导致阴茎长时间勃起。发病至就诊时间 4～ 9h ,平均 6.4h。其中 2例就诊前于外院行阿拉明海绵体内注射、海绵体穿刺抽吸等无效后转来我院。1.2　治疗方法　先行海绵体穿刺抽吸 ,抽出瘀血30～ 5 0ml,然后将 1%亚甲蓝注射液 (江苏…     

西地那非治疗前列腺根治术后勃起功能障碍

前列腺根治术后患者常发生勃起功能障碍(ED),部分患者应用阴茎海绵体内注射(IC)治疗后虽有一定疗效,但该方法可造成创伤,且不良反应大。长期使用阴茎海绵体内注射治疗的患者能否改用口服西地那非(万艾可()治疗并获得满意的性生活呢?Raina R等近期发表在Urology[2004,63(3):532-     

无创性动态阴茎海绵体测压初探

目的 :初步评价VISER软件进行无创性动态阴茎海绵体测压在ED诊断中的应用。　方法 :采用AquariusXLT型尿流动力学仪配置的VISER软件 ,辅助眼镜式影像仪听觉视觉性刺激 (AVSS)或阴茎海绵体内血管活性药物注射 (ICI)进行无创性动态海绵体测压 68例 ,其中ED病人 4 8例 ,正常对照 2 0例。　结果 :正常对照 2 0例均可通过AVSS诱发勃起 ;4 8例ED病人中 ,18例单纯通过AVSS可诱发勃起 ,占 3 7.5 % ;3 0例单纯AVSS无效者 ,给予罂粟碱 10mg海绵体内注射 ,其中 19例出现勃起 ,占 63 .3 %。VISER检查结果表明 ,除受ICI影响 ,ED罂粟碱组的勃起平均时间延长外 ,勃起数据和峰值数据中的其他多项指标ED各组均低于对照组 ,尤其表现为勃起和峰值总能量降低。　结论 :VISER具有精确的动态阴茎海绵体测压功能 ;辅助眼镜式影像仪有助于增强AVSS的效果和减少阴茎海绵体ICI剂量 ;由于VISER检查具有无创、准确、便捷等优点 ,有望成为今后ED诊断的首选方法。     

西地那非治疗合并勃起功能障碍的早泄病人的临床观察

目的 :评价枸橼酸西地那非对合并勃起功能障碍 (ED)的早泄病人的临床疗效和安全性。　方法 :45例诊断为合并ED早泄病人 ,以西地那非片可调整用药方案治疗 1～ 3个月。以阴道内射精潜伏期及配偶性交满意度来评价早泄治疗效果 ,并评估ED的总体疗效和治疗满意度 ,比较治疗前后的国际勃起功能指数评分 5 (IIEF 5 )。　结果 :早泄改善者共 2 7例 ,有效率为 6 0 %。勃起功能改善者共 40例 ,改善率为 88.88%。 2 7例早泄有效者均为 5 0mg西地那非改善了勃起功能的病人 ,且满意率为81.48%;18例早泄无效者中ED治疗满意率仅为 5 .5 6 %。在早泄有效者和无效者间比较其治疗前、后IIEF 5评分及增加值 ,差异均有显著性 (P <0 .0 0 1)。不良反应共 9例(2 0 %) ,均为轻度或中度 ,未经特殊处理即自行缓解。　结论 :对合并ED的早泄病人 ,枸橼酸西地那非片能安全有效地改善其勃起功能 ,如获得满意疗效多能使病人早泄得到改善。     

勃起功能障碍患者可成功从海绵体内注射前列腺素E1改为口服枸橼酸西地那非治疗

海绵体内注射疗法是一种公认的治疗勃起功能障碍（ED）最有效的非手术疗法，但其具有侵入性且很可能发生阴茎异常勃起。为了寻求更安全的替代疗法，Giuliano等进行研究，评估了ED患者从海绵体内注射前列腺素E1转变为口服枸橼酸西地那非的成功率。     

阴茎背深静脉包埋术治疗勃起功能障碍5例

目的 :评价阴茎背深静脉包埋术治疗勃起功能障碍 (ED)的疗效。　方法 :对 3例静脉性和 2例动静脉混合性ED病人施行阴茎背深静脉包埋术 ,术后随访疗效。　结果 :术后 2个月首次随访 ,3例静脉性ED病人获得满意性交 ,2例动静脉混合性ED病人基本能勃起 ,口服西地那非 5 0mg后可以完成性交。 5例术后随访 3～ 12个月(平均 7个月 )保持以上疗效。　结论 :阴茎背深静脉包埋术创伤小 ,几乎无并发症 ,是治疗静脉性ED的有效疗法     

两组药物海绵体内注射治疗勃起功能障碍效果比较

目的 :为临床勃起功能障碍 (ED)治疗时海绵体内注射 (ICI)选药提供临床资料。　方法 :5 6例ED病人 ,随机分 2组 ,每组 2 8例。第 1组用酚妥拉明 2～ 10mg +罂粟碱 10～ 3 0mg ,第 2组用酚妥拉明 2～ 5mg +罂粟碱 10～15mg +川芎嗪 40mg注射液治疗。 　结果 :第 2组勃起时间、勃起硬度足以完成性交例数均优于第 1组 (P <0 .0 5 )。　结论 :ICI合用川芎嗪可延长勃起时间 ,增强勃起硬度 ,减少海绵体内结节发生 ,为一种低价安全的ICI用药     

选择不同剂量他达拉非治疗ED的临床标准初步探索

目的:本文通过观察不同剂量他达拉非(希爱力)对于勃起功能障碍(ED)患者的治疗效果,探索他达拉非剂量与阴茎血流彩色多普勒参数之间的关系。方法:对136例ED患者在治疗前后进行IIEF-5评分同时用彩色多普勒超声联合阴茎血管活性药物前列腺素(PGE1)注射试验,检测阴茎双侧海绵体动脉的收缩期最大流速(PSV)。根据治疗前不同的PSV值,随机分为4组,采用了疗程为4周的隔日晚餐后口服不同剂量他达那非的用药方案。A组:PSV>15 cm/s,选择10 mg剂量;B组:PSV>15 cm/s,选择5 mg剂量;C组:PSV<15 cm/s,选择10 mg剂量;D组:PSV<15 cm/s,选择5 mg剂量。结果:治疗4周后,经统计学分析,4组IIEF-5评分以及阴茎双侧海绵体动脉的PSV与治疗前相比均有显著提高(P<0.01)。而且治疗4周后,A组与B组IIEF-5评分以及阴茎双侧海绵体动脉的PSV之间没有明显差异;C组却显著高于D组(P<0.01)。结论:隔日口服不同剂量的他达那非均能有效提高ED患者阴茎海绵体动脉的收缩期最大流速,改善患者的勃起质量。PSV>15 cm/s的ED患者可选择小剂量5 mg隔日;PSV<15 cm/s的ED患者尽量选择较大剂量10 mg隔日,以取得更好的疗效。     

Is sildenafil citrate an alternative agent in the evaluation of penile vascular system with color Doppler ultrasound?

IINTRODUCION: The ideal diagnosis and therapeutic agent for erectile dysfunction (ED) would be an oral drug taken prior to color Doppler ultrasound (CDU) examination and sexual intercourse. In the present study we have investigated if the efficacy of oral sildenafil is optimal in the diagnosis of underlying pathology of ED. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study group comprised of 41 patients with ED. Firstly, all patients underwent CDU examinations after the combined intracavernosal injection of 60 mg of papaverine and sexual stimulation (CIS). Secondly, these patients were examined after taking 50 mg of oral sildenafil citrate combined with self-manual and visual sexual stimulation. RERSULTS The differences of peak systolic velocity values were statistically significant between CIS and sildenafil (right: 40.7 +/- 2.9 vs. 28.7 +/- 3.3; left: 41.2 +/- 3.3 vs. 25.7 +/- 2.4; p < 0.001) in patients with normal penile vascular system. However, end-diastolic velocity and resistance index values were not significant between the same groups. In addition, there were not significant differences for peak systolic and end-diastolic blood flow velocities and resistances index with CIS and sildenafil in cases with vasculogenic ED. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil citrate plus visual sexual stimulation is not reliable as CIS to make accurate interpretation of penile vascular status using CDU. On the other hand, in some cases suspected of psychogenic ED after detailed sexual history, sildenafil might be tried as an initial step of the functional evaluation with CDU in order to prevent prolonged erection risk with intracavernosal injection of vasoactive agents.     

Early combination therapy: intracavernosal injections and sildenafil following radical prostatectomy increases sexual activity and the return of natural erections

Early pharmacological prophylaxis has been reported to increase the return of spontaneous erections following radical prostatectomy (RP). In this study, we evaluated the role of intracavernosal alprostadil (PGE1) combined with sildenafil in stimulating early recovery of spontaneous erections following RP. In this prospective study, we included 22 patients who underwent bilateral nerve-sparing RP after October 2004. Sildenafil dose of 50 mg/day was started at the time of hospital discharge. Of 22 patients, 18 started on PGE1-4 microg (1-8) and four started on low-dose Trimix (20 U) 2-3 times/week. These patients are followed up at regular intervals (3, 6, 9 and 12 months) with abridged version of the International Index for Erectile Function-5 questionnaire. Patient compliance, return of sexual activity and return of natural erection, adverse effects and reasons for discontinuation were recorded. Penile doppler studies were performed during followup visits to assess the vascular status. After a mean followup of 6 months (3-8 months), 11/22 (50%) patients had return of spontaneous partial erections. Of the 18 PGE1 users, six continued 4 microg PGE1, four increased the dose to 8 microg, six decreased the dose to 2 microg and two patients further reduced the dose to 1 microg. Of four low-dose Trimix users, three increased the dose to 30 U and one reduced the dose to 15 U. Of 22 patients, 21 were sexually active: 12/21 (57%) with the injections alone and 9/21 (42.9%) with combination therapy (injections (PGE1) and sildenafil). Penile doppler studies revealed arterial insufficiency in 77% (17/22) patients and venous insufficiency in one patient. Early intracavernosal injections following RP facilitated early sexual intercourse, patient satisfaction and potentially earlier return of natural erections. Early combination therapy with sildenafil allowed a lower dose of intracavernous injections, minimizing the penile discomfort.     

Erectile dysfunction after kidney transplantation: our 22 years of experience

AIM: To evaluate the results of treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in kidney transplant recipients before and after the advent of sildenafil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1981 through 2002, 971 male patients of mean age 53.4 years received a renal graft. Erectile dysfunction (ED) was investigated in all patients at the first urologic visit posttransplantation. Psycho-sexual support was offered to all patients. Before sildenafil use (1998), our diagnostic approach was complex. From 1998 we tested: serum levels of testosterone, prolactin, and glucose with penile duplex ultrasonography and NPT reserved for selected cases. RESULTS: From 1981 through 1998, 365 male kidney transplant recipients (45%) reported ED. Only 169 patients chose to be treated: 27 responded to psycho-sexual therapy; 3 received testosterone with benefit; 133 had a good results from intracavernosal injection of vasoactive drugs; and 6 received a penile prosthesis. Since 1998, 126 patients reported ED (78.3%). Only 78 chose treatment: 24 patients had a satisfactory response to sildenafil (65% with 50 mg and 35% with 100 mg). PGE1 alone or in combination with papaverine and phentolamine produced a good response in 37 patients; 17 patients did not respond to pharmacotherapy; and 5 received a tricomponent penile prosthesis without complications. The side effects of sildenafil and PGE1 therapy were similar to those reported in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: ED is an important problem in male renal transplant recipients. Cultural resistance to treatment is common. However, treatment with sildenafil citrate and intracavernosal self-injection of PGE1 are well accepted, and prosthetic devices may help in resistant cases.     

Preference for oral sildenafil or intracavernosal injection in patients with erectile dysfunction already using intracavernosal injection for > 1 year

Authors from Seoul describe their experience with patients already on triple therapy by intracavernosal injection who changed to oral sildenafil. Rather surprisingly, they found that patients had had a greater preference than expected for triple therapy, feeling that they had a better quality of erection on intracavernosal injection. The subject of the effect of renal transplantation on sperm quality and sex hormone levels is discussed by authors from Teheran. They found that sperm morphology and density remained unchanged, but there were significant improvements in sperm mobility. There was also an improvement in hormone levels and sexual function. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and preference for oral sildenafil or intracavernosal injection (ICI) therapy in patients with erectile dysfunction (ED) already using ICI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 69 patients with ED (mean age 55.1 years, sd 12.3) on ICI therapy with triple solution (papaverine/phentolamine/prostaglandin-E1) for > 1 year were recruited for the study. Their erection quality, adverse reactions and selection rate of oral sildenafil or ICI as treatment, after using sildenafil for 3 months, and the reasons for their preferences, were compared between the regimens, RESULTS: Overall, 52 men (75%) responded to sildenafil; of these men, the erection quality with ICI was better than that with sildenafil in 46 (89%) and 16 (31%) preferred ICI as their treatment. Eighteen patients (35%) used each treatment alternately and 18 (35%) used sildenafil exclusively. The main reason given by patients for choosing ICI was a better quality of erection (74%). CONCLUSION: More patients with ED and using ICI preferred it as their main treatment than was expected, even though they had a good response to oral sildenafil. A better quality of erection with ICI was the reason why experienced patients chose this method, differing from the choice of patients starting treatment for ED.     

Efficacy, safety and patient acceptance of sildenafil citrate as treatment for erectile dysfunction

PURPOSE: We assessed the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate as treatment for erectile dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 433 completely evaluated men with chronic erectile dysfunction were treated with sildenafil citrate. Response was assessed prospectively by baseline and followup physician interviews, and by a patient self-administered 15-item questionnaire on the domains of patient treatment response and satisfaction, partner treatment satisfaction, comparative previous treatment satisfaction, adverse effects, and patient and partner quality of life. RESULTS: Of the 304 men (70.2%) who completed the questionnaire 278 received sildenafil, including 186 who previously had undergone treatment for erectile dysfunction, principally involving intracavernous injection therapy. A response was elicited by a median dose of 100 mg. in 188 patients (67.6%) who achieved erection suitable for sexual intercourse. Those with psychogenic erectile dysfunction responded significantly better than those with organic dysfunction (p <0.001). Erection suitable for intercourse was attained by 30.8% of patients with erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy and 80% with cavernous veno-occlusive dysfunction. Of previous intracavernous injection responders 29.9% were refractory to sildenafil, while 33. 3% of previous intracavernous injection nonresponders responded to sildenafil. The sildenafil response was considered inferior to the intracavernous injection response by 43.6% of the men who previously responded to intracavernous injection, of whom 51.5% continued to receive intracavernous injection as the only treatment (19.5%) or as an alternative to sildenafil (32%). Adverse effects in 53.6% of cases were assessed as mild in 56.4%, moderate in 38.3% and severe in 5.3%. Multiple adverse effects were reported by 62.4% of patients, while 17 (6.1%) discontinued sildenafil as a direct result of intolerable adverse effects. The most common adverse effects were facial flushing in 33.5% of cases, headaches in 23.4%, nasal congestion in 12.6%, dyspepsia in 10.1% and dizziness in 10.8%. Baseline patient and partner quality of life scores significantly improved after sildenafil treatment (p <0.001), while significantly improved quality of life was noticed by 51.5% and 43.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil citrate is effective oral first line treatment for erectile dysfunction. Although more than 50% of men reported adverse effects, most were considered mild and rarely resulted in treatment cessation. There was a trend in those on intracavernous injection who responded to sildenafil to continue intracavernous injection as the only therapy or as an alternative to sildenafil. Also, we noted that some cases refractory to sildenafil responded to intracavernous injection. These findings imply that intracavernous injection remains an effective erectile dysfunction treatment option.     

Switching from long-term treatment with self-injections to oral sildenafil in diabetic patients with severe erectile dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of oral sildenafil in diabetic men with severe erectile dysfunction (ED), who are successfully treated with intracavernous injections of vasoactive drugs. METHODS: 81 impotent diabetic men (29 with type 1 and 52 with type 2) were treated for 1-7 years with self-injections. 13 men were treated with 10 microg and 15 with 20 microg of prostaglandin E1 (PGE1), and 53 with a mixture of PGE1 20 microg and papaverine 7.5-40 mg (MIX). After a 1-week washout period, they changed to oral sildenafil in titrating doses up to 100mg. The change was successful if the man achieved an erection and penetration even once. RESULTS: Sildenafil was discontinued in 23 men because of insufficiency. Eleven men (13.6%), all with type 2 diabetes, responded to sildenafil (10 previously treated with 10 microg and 1 with 20 microg of PGE1, none treated with MIX). Thus, 39.2% of the treated with PGE1 responded to oral sildenafil. The response was influenced by the age, the type of diabetes (type 2) and the kind of the previously injected drug (PGE1 10 microg); it was not influenced by the duration of diabetes, ED and treatment with self-injections. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the well documented efficacy of sildenafil, self-injections continue to be the solely effective therapeutic modality in many diabetic men afflicted by severe ED. Only the younger men with non-insulin-dependent diabetes, treated with low doses of PGE1 are more likely to respond to oral sildenafil and change treatment. Men with insulin-dependent diabetes or treated with mixtures of vasoactive drugs are not likely to respond to oral sildenafil.     

Prostaglandin E1 in erectile dysfunction. Efficiency and incidence of priapism

Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) was used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in 149 men with erectile dysfunction over a period of 20 months (February 1987-October 1988). The intracavernous application of PGE1 in varying doses resulted in an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse in 79% of cases. In order to differentiate between vascular and non-vascular impotence, 5 micrograms PGE1 were found to be a sufficiently high and safe dose for the first intracavernous injection. Local discomfort, ranging from mild to severe pain after injection, was recorded in 40% of patients. A significant difference in severe side effects was found between arterial, venous and non-vasculogenic impotence, the highest incidence of local pain occurring in non-vasculogenic patients. The most striking result was the occurrence of 4 cases of priapism, all in the non-vascular group, 1 of these occurring after the injection of only 5 micrograms PGE1.     

Sildenafil versus intracavernous injection therapy: efficacy and preference in patients on intracavernous injection for more than 1 year

PURPOSE: To our knowledge comparative data on the effectiveness of and patient preference for intracavernous injection therapy and sildenafil are still not available. We evaluated the efficacy of sildenafil as well as patient preference in a group of impotent men on intracavernous injection for more than a year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients on intracavernous injection therapy for more than a year without neurological disease and/or a contraindication to sildenafil treatment were recruited for study. In phase 1 we determined the efficacy of 50 and 100 mg. sildenafil citrate at home. In phase 2 responders to sildenafil were asked to use the preferred dose orally for a month and choose intracavernous injection or sildenafil. In phase 3 patients were asked to continue either treatment for 3 more months. Patient preferences were reported at the end of phases 2 and 3. RESULTS: Of the 180 men recruited 155 with a mean age of 56.4 +/- 12.6 years on intracavernous injection for a mean of 26 +/- 9 months accepted and were included in our series. Overall 116 men (74.8%) responded to sildenafil during study phase 1. After 1 month of treatment 71 responders (61.2%) preferred to continue with the oral drug, 31 (26.7%) returned to intracavernous injection and 14 (12.1%) used each drug alternately. Three months later 74 of the 116 responders (63.8%) preferred oral treatment and 38 (32.8%) chose intracavernous injection, while 4 (3. 4%) continued to use each treatment alternately. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil is highly effective in intracavernous injection responders, although a certain group prefer to continue intracavernous injection. While sildenafil should be considered first line treatment, men with erectile dysfunction should be aware of all treatment options available because nonresponders to sildenafil may respond to intracavernous injection.     

A NEW METHOD FOR THE EVALUATION OF ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION: SILDENAFIL PLUS DOPPLER ULTRASONOGRAPHY

PURPOSE: Of the various methods of hemodynamic studies performed to evaluate erectile dysfunction penile color Doppler ultrasound is currently considered the best. However, intracavernous injection is invasive and has adverse effects, such as prolonged erection. We evaluated whether sildenafil may be used as a substitute for intracavernous agents when assessing impotence on color Doppler ultrasound. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 42 patients with erectile dysfunction underwent color Doppler ultrasound before and after intracavernous injection of 60 mg. papaverine with genital and audiovisual sexual stimulation. Peak flow and end diastolic velocity were measured in the recorded waveforms obtained 0, 1, 5, 10 and 20 minutes after injection. The patients also underwent color Doppler ultrasound after a 50 mg. oral dose of sildenafil with genital and audiovisual sexual stimulation not before 3 days after the papaverine study. The same parameters were measured at 30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 minutes, and compared with the values obtained after papaverine injection. RESULTS: Mean peak flow velocity significantly increased after oral sildenafil starting at 30 minutes and achieving a maximum value at 60 minutes. There were no significant differences in the 2 methods in mean peak velocity 1, 5, 10 and 20 minutes after papaverine injection, and 30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 minutes after oral sildenafil administration. Penile color Doppler ultrasound with intracavernous papaverine injection is accepted as the gold standard but color Doppler ultrasound with sildenafil has 90% sensitivity and 100% selectivity for demonstrating arterial insufficiency. Due to prolonged erection 5 patients (11.9%) in the papaverine group required pharmacological detumescence by intracavernous injection. No adverse effects of sildenafil were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil administration achieved increased peak flow velocity comparable to that after intracavernous papaverine injection. With no prolonged erection sildenafil emerges as a safer alternative compared to more invasive intracavernous injection.     

Different hemodynamic responses by color Doppler ultrasonography studies between sildenafil non-responders and responders

Aim： To determine if there are different penile hemodynamic patterns between sildenafil non-responders and responders by using color Doppler ultrasonography. Methods： A total of 69 erectile dysfunction （ED） patients aged 22-79 years were enrolled into the present study. Thirty-eight （55.1%） men with ED who did not respond to four attempts of treatment with 100 mg sildenafil after re-education were classified as sildenafil non-responders. A com- bination of three vasodilator drugs, 1.25 mg papaverine, 0.4 mg phentolamine and 5 ug prostaglandin E1, was given by intracavernous injection before penile Doppler ultrasonography was carried out. The erectile response to intracavernous injection and vascular parameters including peak systolic velocity （PSV）, resistance index （RI）, end diastolic velocity （EDV） and cavernosa artery diameter （CD） were measured and the results between sildenafil nonresponders and responders were compared. Results： No statistical difference in vascular parameters measured by Doppler ultrasonography studies between non-responders and responders was noted. Sildenafil non-responders had a poorer penile rigidity response to intracavernous injection than responders （P 〈 0.05）. Among patients with adequate PSV （〉 30 cm/s） and abnormal EDV （〉 5 cm/s）, individuals in the non-responder group had fewer positive responses to intracavernous vasodilator injection than in the responder group （35.3% vs. 72.2%, P 〈 0.05）. Advanced age and comorbidity with diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with sildenafil non-response （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion： Sildenafil non-responders were characterized by a poorer penile rigidity response to intracavernous injection and had an associated impaired veno-occlusive mechanism. Advanced age and comorbidity with diabetes mellitus were two common factors associated with non-response.