Do men with mild erectile dysfunction have the same risk factors as the general erectile dysfunction clinical trial population?

Abstract

Objective: • To compare the underlying risk for diseases associated with erectile dysfunction (ED; i.e. cardiovascular disease and diabetes) in a population of men with mild ED relative to a general ED clinical trial population.

Patients and methods: • Men enrolled in a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled (DBPC) trial of sildenafil for the treatment of mild ED were compared with a database of men enrolled in 67 of the manufacturer's other DBPC sildenafil trials. • The main outcome measures were baseline demographics, comorbidities and concomitant medications.

Results: • In both populations, most men were white, approximately one quarter were smokers, and most had an organic component to their ED etiology. • In the mild ED population (N = 176) versus the database population (N = 14,537), mean ± sd (range) age was 50 ± 12 (19-84) versus 55 ± 11 (18-89) years, body mass index was 29 ± 5 (20-48) versus 28 ± 5 (11-64) kg/m² and ED duration was 3.5 ± 3.2 (< 1-18) versus 4.6 ± 4.7 (< 1-45) years. • The prevalence of comorbidities associated with ED was similar (hypertension 26.1% (n = 46) vs 32.8%; diabetes mellitus 13.6% (n = 24) vs 22.1%; dyslipidemias 12.5% (n = 22) vs 11.7%; hypercholesterolemia 12.5% (n = 22) vs 9.5%; gastro-esophageal reflux disease 10.8% (n = 19) vs 6.0%; benign prostatic hyperplasia 9.7% (n = 17) vs 9.9%; depression 6.3% (n = 11) vs 5.6%; and anxiety 4.0% (n = 7) vs 1.6%), as was the rate of use of medications for those comorbidities.

Conclusions: • Men with mild ED have similar risk factors to a general ED clinical trial population. Thus, mild ED is an important indicator of risk for underlying disease associated with ED. • Inquiry into ED should be part of routine clinical evaluation to facilitate rapid identification and early intervention. • Men complaining of mild ED should be evaluated adequately for underlying cardiovascular risk.