Post-radical prostatectomy pharmacological penile rehabilitation: practice patterns among the international society for sexual medicine practitioners.
ABSTRACT Despite the fact that there is minimal evidence-based data supporting it, the concept of pharmacological penile rehabilitation following radical prostatectomy (RP) is receiving great attention.
To define attitudes and practice patterns of clinicians who were members of the International Society for Sexual Medicine (ISSM) and/or its affiliated societies.
Members of the ISSM and its regional affiliates were invited to participate in a web-based survey.
Demographic factors, current practice status, and opinions regarding post-RP erectile dysfunction and penile rehabilitation. The statistical methods used included chi-square, Student's t-tests, and logistic regression analysis.
Three hundred-one physicians from 41 countries completed the questionnaire (82% were urologists). Sixty-five percent of the responders had formal sexual medicine specialty training, 44% had uro-oncology specialty training, and 60% performed RPs. Eighty-seven percent performed some form of rehabilitation. As part of the primary rehabilitation strategy, 95% used phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5), 30% used vacuum device, 75% used intracavernosal injections, and 9.9% used intraurethral prostaglandin. Fifty-four percent commenced rehabilitation immediately/just after urethral catheter removal, and 37% within the first 4 months after RP. Neither the number of years in medical practice, clinician age, nor country/region of practice differed between rehabilitation performers and non-performers. With regard to the primary reason for avoiding rehabilitation: 50% responded said it is the cost; 25% said the fact that it is not evidence-based; and 25% said they were not familiar with the concept. Performing rehabilitation was positively associated with urologic oncology training (P = 0.03), performing RP (P < 0.001), and seeing over 50 post-RP patients per year (P = 0.011).
Among ISSM members post-RP penile rehabilitation is widely practiced, commenced early, and based predominantly on PDE5 inhibitors and intracavernosal injections. Clinicians who perform RP or see over 50 such patients per year are the most likely to perform rehabilitation. Cost represents the most common reason for rehabilitation neglect.
SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: IntroductionIntracavernous alprostadil injection (IAI) is a widely used treatment for sexual rehabilitation (SR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). It is unknown whether the continuation of IAI beyond 1 year continues to improve erectile function.AimsTo assess evolution of sexual function in patients using IAI who are nonresponsive to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) between 12 (M12) and 24 (M24) months after RP.Methods We retrospectively studied 75 men with a nerve-sparing laparoscopic RP, who had normal preoperative erectile function, and who regularly used IAI for SR for at least 24 months. At M12, no patients had responded to PDE5i.Main Outcome MeasuresAt 12 and 24 months, sexual function was assessed with the UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-15, and erection hardness score (EHS) with and without IAI. We also assessed the satisfaction rate with IAI, injection-related penile pain, and satisfaction of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed by using t-tests for paired data and Spearman's rho correlation coefficients to assess the relationships between scores at M12 and M24.ResultsImprovement of nocturnal erection was noted (UCLA-PCI, question 25); however, no significant difference was found for IIEF-erectile function with (19.60 ± 9.80 vs. 18.07 ± 10.44) and without IAI (4.63 ± 2.93 vs. 4.92 ± 4.15), UCLA-PCI-sexual bother (37.14 ± 21.45 vs. 37.54 ± 19.67), nor the EHS score with (2.97 ± 1.30 vs. 2.57 ± 1.30) and without IAI (0.67 ± 1.11 vs. 0.76 ± 0.10). The rate of satisfaction with treatment decreased over time (66.6% vs. 46.7%, P = 0.013). Improved response to IAI at M12 was not correlated to improvement in spontaneous erections at M24.Conclusion The response to IAI remained stable after 2 years of treatment, and no significant improvement of spontaneous erections during intercourse attempts was found between M12 and M24. Patients should be informed of the limited effect of IAI on natural erections after 1 year. Yiou R, Bütow Z, Parisot J, Binhas M, Lingombet O, Augustin D, de la Taille A, and Audureau E. Is it worth continuing sexual rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy with intracavernous injection of alprostadil for more than 1 year? Sex Med **;**:**–**.12/2014; 3(1). DOI:10.1002/sm2.51
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Erectile dysfunction is the most common complication after pelvic radical surgery. Rehabilitation programs are increasingly being used in clinical practice but there is no high level of evidence supporting its efficacy. The principle of early penile rehabilitation stems from animal studies showing early histological and molecular changes associated with penile corporal hypoxia after cavernous nerve injury. The concept of early penile rehabilitation was developed in late nineties with a subsequent number of clinical studies supporting early pharmacologic penile rehabilitation. These studies included all available phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection and intraurethral use of prostaglandin E1 and to lesser extent vacuum erectile devices. However, these studies are of small number, difficult to interpret, and often with no control group. Furthermore, no studies have proven an in vivo derangement of endothelial or smooth muscle cell metabolism secondary to a prolonged flaccid state. The purpose of the present report is a synthetic overview of the literature in order to analyze the concept and the rationale of rehabilitation program of erectile dysfunction following radical pelvic surgery and the evidence of such programs in clinical practice. Emphasis will be placed on penile rehabilitation programs after radical cystoprostatectomy, radical prostatectomy, and rectal cancer treatment. Future perspectives are also analyzed.02/2015; 2015:1-11. DOI:10.1155/2015/876046
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although disease-free survival remains the primary goal of prostate cancer treatment, erectile dysfunction (ED) remains a common complication that affects the quality of life. Even though several preventive and therapeutic strategies are available for ED after radical prostatectomy (RP), no specific recommendations have been made on the optimal rehabilitation or treatment strategy. Several treatment options are available, including phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, vacuum erection devices, intracavernosal or intraurethral prostaglandin injections, and penile prostheses. Urologists must consider more effective ways to establish optimal treatments for ED after RP. ED is an important issue among patients with prostate cancer, and many patients hope for early ED recovery after surgery. This review highlights the currently available treatment options for ED after RP and discusses the limitations of each.Korean journal of urology 02/2015; 56(2):99. DOI:10.4111/kju.2015.56.2.99