Prostaglandin E1 versus mixture of prostaglandin E1, papaverine and phentolamine in nonresponders to high papaverine plus phentolamine doses
- PMID: 8583605
Prostaglandin E1 versus mixture of prostaglandin E1, papaverine and phentolamine in nonresponders to high papaverine plus phentolamine doses
Abstract
Purpose: We evaluated the efficacy of 40 micrograms/ml, prostaglandin E1 versus a combination of 17.64 mg./ml. papaverine hydrochloride, 0.58 mg./ml. phentolamine mesylate and 5.8 micrograms/ml. prostaglandin E1 (3-drug mixture).
Materials and methods: A total of 32 patients randomly received 1 ml. of either medication by the intracavernous route. All patients had presented with erectile dysfunction longer than 6 months in duration and had failed to respond to high doses of papaverine (60 mg.) plus phentolamine (1 mg).
Results: Of 32 patients 7 (22%) responded to prostaglandin E1 and 16 (50%) to the 3-drug mixture, achieving erections allowing penetration (grade E4 or E5, p < 0.05). Pain was reported by 41% of the patients receiving prostaglandin E1 and 12.5% administered the 3-drug mixture.
Conclusions: The 3-drug mixture may be regarded as more effective than prostaglandin E1 alone in inducing an erectile response with a decreased incidence of pain.
Comment in
-
Impotence on the rise as a urological subspecialty.J Urol. 1996 Mar;155(3):924-5. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)66347-x. J Urol. 1996. PMID: 8583608 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Comparative study of papaverine plus phentolamine versus prostaglandin E1 in erectile dysfunction.J Urol. 1997 Jun;157(6):2132-4. J Urol. 1997. PMID: 9146599 Clinical Trial.
-
Papaverine-phentolamine and prostaglandin E1 versus papaverine-phentolamine alone for intracorporeal injection therapy: a clinical double-blind study.J Urol. 1995 Sep;154(3):1017-9. J Urol. 1995. PMID: 7637045 Clinical Trial.
-
[Prospective study of the effectiveness and side effects of intracavernous prostaglandin E1 versus papaverine or papaverine phentolamine in the diagnosis and treatment of erection dysfunction. Review of the literature].Actas Urol Esp. 1992 Mar;16(3):208-16. Actas Urol Esp. 1992. PMID: 1621545 Review. Spanish.
-
What nonresponse to intracavernous injection really indicates: a determination by quantitative analysis.J Urol. 2002 Jan;167(1):192-6. J Urol. 2002. PMID: 11743303
-
Erectile dysfunction: intracavernous treatment.Curr Med Res Opin. 2000;16 Suppl 1:s59-62. doi: 10.1185/0300799009117041. Curr Med Res Opin. 2000. PMID: 11329824 Review.
Cited by
-
Health-related quality of life in men with erectile dysfunction.J Gen Intern Med. 1998 Mar;13(3):159-66. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00050.x. J Gen Intern Med. 1998. PMID: 9541372 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of the sensitivity of different doses of vasoactive drugs in diagnosing erectile dysfunction in impotent patients: a prospective case-control study.Cent European J Urol. 2021;74(1):109-115. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2021.00042.R1. Epub 2021 Feb 6. Cent European J Urol. 2021. PMID: 33976925 Free PMC article.
-
Intracavernosal therapy: when oral agents fail.Curr Urol Rep. 2001 Dec;2(6):468-72. doi: 10.1007/s11934-001-0041-9. Curr Urol Rep. 2001. PMID: 12084233 Review.
-
Penile rehabilitation following treatment for prostate cancer: an analysis of the current state of the art.Can Urol Assoc J. 2009 Feb;3(1):37-48. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.1014. Can Urol Assoc J. 2009. PMID: 19293974 Free PMC article.
-
Erectile dysfunction.BMJ Clin Evid. 2011 Jun 29;2011:1803. BMJ Clin Evid. 2011. PMID: 21711956 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical