Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2001 Jul;88(1):58-62.
doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.02254.x.

Comparative evaluation of treatments for erectile dysfunction in patients with prostate cancer after radical retropubic prostatectomy

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative evaluation of treatments for erectile dysfunction in patients with prostate cancer after radical retropubic prostatectomy

J Baniel et al. BJU Int. 2001 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of a progressive local treatment protocol for erectile dysfunction (ED) in patients after undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) for prostate cancer.

Patients and methods: The study included 85 patients (mean age 59.5 years, range 50--75) with ED after RRP. Treatment was offered in four progressive phases, with patients passing to the next phase only if they failed the previous one: in phase I patients used a vacuum erection device; in phase II, sildenafil; in phase III, intracorporal injection; and in phase IV, intracorporal injection plus the vacuum erection device. The patients were followed for 1 year.

Results: Of the 85 patients, 78 (92%) responded to the vacuum erection device (with an erection sufficient for vaginal penetration), but only 11 (14%) agreed to continue with it at home. Of the remaining 74 patients, 69 with no contraindications were given sildenafil and 14 (20%) had a positive response. Sixty patients were then treated with intracorporal injection and 51 (85%) had a positive response; four of the nine failures in phase III responded to intracorporal injection plus vacuum therapy. Five patients failed all four protocols. After 1 year of follow-up, 76 of the 80 patients were successfully continuing treatment at home; seven (9%) used the vacuum erection device, 11 (14%) sildenafil, 54 (71%) intracorporal injection and four (5%) intracorporal injection plus the vacuum erection device.

Conclusion: Overall, this progressive treatment method gave a positive response in 80 of the 85 patients (94%). After 1 year of follow-up, 76 of the 80 patients (95%) continued to respond well. Of all the methods used, intracorporal injection was the most effective for ED after RRP.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources