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
. 2015 Apr;12(4):975-84.
doi: 10.1111/jsm.12848. Epub 2015 Mar 2.

Erectile dysfunction as a marker for cardiovascular disease diagnosis and intervention: a cost analysis

Affiliations

Erectile dysfunction as a marker for cardiovascular disease diagnosis and intervention: a cost analysis

Alexander W Pastuszak et al. J Sex Med. 2015 Apr.

Abstract

Introduction: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). We examine the costs of screening men with ED for CVD risk factors and the cost savings of treating these at risk men.

Aim: This study aims to evaluate the effect of screening men presenting with ED for CVD risk factors and to determine the cost effectiveness of this screening protocol.

Methods: The known incidence and prevalence of ED and CVD, the rate of undiagnosed CVD, and the effects of CVD treatment were used to model the change in prevalence of acute CVD events and ED as a function of the number of men with ED and CVD. The cost savings associated with reduction in acute cardiovascular (CV) events and ED prevalence was estimated over 20 years.

Main outcome measures: Acute CVD event rate reduction and associated cost savings were modeled over 20 years.

Results: The relative risk of ED in men with CVD is 1.47 and the coprevalence of both ED and CVD was estimated at 1,991,520 men. Approximately 44% of men with CVD risk factors are unaware of their risk. If all men presenting with ED were screened for CVD, 5.8 million men with previously unknown CVD risk factors would be identified over 20 years, costing $2.7 billion to screen. Assuming a 20% decrease in CV events as a result of screening and treatment, 1.1 million cardiovascular events would be avoided, saving $21.3 billion over 20 years. Similarly, 1.1 million cases of ED would be treated, saving $9.7 billion. Together, the reduction in acute CVD and ED treatment cost would save $28.5 billion over 20 years.

Conclusions: Screening for CVD in men presenting with ED can be a cost-effective intervention for secondary prevention of both CVD and, over the longer term, ED.

Keywords: Cardiovascular Disease; Cardiovascular Disease Treatment; Cardiovascular Risk Factors; Cost Analysis; Erectile Dysfunction; Erectile Dysfunction Treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Selection of Relevant Articles for Identification of ED and CVD Incidence and Prevalence
Flow chart depicting selection process of published articles containing ED and CVD prevalence and incidence data.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Undiagnosed CVD in Men with ED
Chart depicting the rise in incidences of ED alone and CVD in men with ED projected over 20 years.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Cost Savings Associated with Screening for CVD in Men with ED
Chart depicting annual cost savings associated with screening for CVD in men with ED extrapolated over 20 years. The gray line estimates the number of CVD events avoided per year. The filled gray regions represent cost savings associated with screening men with ED for CVD and subsequent treatment, either as a function of ED or CVD. Cumulatively, over 1.1 million CV events are avoided with a cumulative savings of over $28.5 billion. Annual screening costs are also indicated and represent a small fraction of the total cost savings.

References

    1. Saigal CS, et al. Predictors and prevalence of erectile dysfunction in a racially diverse population. Arch. Intern. Med. 2006;166:207–212. - PubMed
    1. Araujo AB, et al. Does Erectile Dysfunction Contribute to Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction Beyond the Framingham Risk Score? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2010;55:350–356. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Polinski JM, Kesselheim AS. Where Cost, Medical Necessity, and Morality Meet: Should US Government Insurance Programs Pay for Erectile Dysfunction Drugs? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;89:17–19. - PubMed
    1. Gandaglia G, et al. A systematic review of the association between erectile dysfunction and cardiovascular disease. Eur. Urol. 2014;65:968–978. - PubMed
    1. Thompson IM, et al. ERectile dysfunction and subsequent cardiovascular disease. JAMA. 2005;294:2996–3002. - PubMed

Publication types