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
Review
. 2025 May 2.
doi: 10.1038/s41443-025-01047-0. Online ahead of print.

Prostatic and pelvic imaging parameters to predict post radical prostatectomy erectile function recovery: a systematic review

Affiliations
Review

Prostatic and pelvic imaging parameters to predict post radical prostatectomy erectile function recovery: a systematic review

Abdullah Al-Mitwalli et al. Int J Impot Res. .

Abstract

With radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, there may be associated long-term postoperative sequalae: urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction (ED). It is important to predict the functional recovery of erections for better patient counselling and timely treatment of ED. This systematic review looks at imaging parameters to predict the recovery of erectile function (EF) after laparoscopic or robotic prostatectomy. A systematic search was performed to capture publications from January 2000 up to December 2023 (PROSPERO; Registrations ID CRD 42022359557). The considered studies applied an imaging parameter obtained by any form of imaging modality and in any operative phase (pre- or intraoperative) to assess the potential impact on EF after surgery. An essential criterion was a formal EF assessment at both baseline and postoperatively, by means of a validated questionnaire. A total of 8 studies met our inclusion criteria. We categorised the studies based on the imaging modality into three groups: MRI (n = 4), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) (n = 2), and intraoperative ultrasonography (n = 2). Preoperative MRI parameters were, firstly, dynamic contrast enhancement of prostatic tissue measured as ratio of change of contrast from baseline to 120 s (Ratio120) showing weak correlation to postoperative IIEF5 scores (r = 0.31; p = 0.044), and secondly, area of neurovascular bundle (NVB) was a predictor of EF recovery on univariate analysis (odds ratio = 1.30; P = 0.001). Bony pelvic dimensions, prostate surface area, and fascial thickness measured on MRI did not show correlation with EF scores. Two studies using DTI were included, with one showing the change in the number of periprostatic nerve fibres before and after surgery, which also demonstrated a correlation with the change in EF scores (r = 0.35; P < 0.05). While the other study using DTI showed the change direction of the periprostatic nerve fibres before and after surgery measured as a value of functional anistropy, it showed a weak negative correlation to postoperative EF scores on the left (r = -0.66120; p = 0.0006) and right (r = -0.420068; p = 0.0456). Additionally, intraoperative ultrasound assessment of the NVB, such as the number of visible vessels within the NVB, has also been shown to correlate (r = 0.34, p = 0.0001) with postoperative EF. Our systematic review could not identify an imaging parameter strongly correlated with EF recovery. Enhancement of the prostate on mpMRI and intraoperative ultrasound might be worth investigating through better-designed studies. More research is needed to establish which parameters can reliably predict EF post-prostatectomy to best inform the patient and mitigate the risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

References

    1. Cancer Research UK. Prostate cancer statistics. 2018. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancerstatistics/st... . Accessed 18 Mar 2025.
    1. Culp MB, Soerjomataram I, Efstathiou JA, Bray F, Jemal A. Recent global patterns in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates. Eur Urol. 2020;77:38–52. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, et al. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1767–77. - PubMed - PMC - DOI
    1. Oerther B, Engel H, Bamberg F, Sigle A, Gratzke C, Benndorf M. Cancer detection rates of the PI-RADSv2.1 assessment categories: systematic review and meta-analysis on lesion level and patient level. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022;25:256–63. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Edn. presented at the EAU annual congress milan 2023. EAU Guidelines. 2022.

LinkOut - more resources