COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of satisfaction rates and erectile function in patients treated with sildenafil, intracavernous prostaglandin E1 and penile implant surgery for erectile dysfunction in urology practice.

PURPOSE: We compared erectile function status and satisfaction rates in patients who received treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) with sildenafil, intracavernous prostaglandin E1 (ICI) and penile implant surgery (IPP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 138 consecutive patients who received treatment for ED between April 2000 and April 2001 were considered candidates for study. Mean followup was 19.54 months. Of the patients 27 were not available for followup and 26 were not on any form of treatment. Of the patients receiving treatment for ED 85 were administered the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory for Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire and the Erectile Function Domain (EFD) of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire. Three treatment groups were identified, including 31 patients on sildenafil citrate, 22 on ICI and 32 who underwent IPP. Mean total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores in the 3 groups were considered for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in the total EDITS (25.59 versus 27.06, p = 0.48), EDITS Index (58.16 versus 61.15, p = 0.49) or EFD (22.91 versus 20.26, p = 0.12) score between the groups on ICI and sildenafil citrate, respectively. Total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores were significantly higher in patients who underwent IPP than those on sildenafil citrate (36.09 versus 27.06, p <0.001, 82.03 versus 61.51, p <0.001 and 27.88 versus 20.26, p <0.001, respectively). Total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores were significantly higher in patients who underwent IPP than those on ICI (36.09 versus 25.59, 82.03 versus 58.16 and 27.88 versus 22.91, respectively, all p <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: At a mean followup of 19.54 months patients who underwent penile implant surgery had significantly better erectile function and treatment satisfaction than those receiving sildenafil citrate and intracavernous prostaglandin E1.

Full text links

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Group 7SearchHeart failure treatmentPapersTopicsCollectionsEffects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure Importance: Only 1 class of glucose-lowering agents-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors-has been reported to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events primarily by reducingSeptember 1, 2017: JAMA CardiologyAssociations of albuminuria in patients with chronic heart failure: findings in the ALiskiren Observation of heart Failure Treatment study.CONCLUSIONS: Increased UACR is common in patients with heart failure, including non-diabetics. Urinary albumin creatininineJul, 2011: European Journal of Heart FailureRandomized Controlled TrialEffects of Liraglutide on Clinical Stability Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Review

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app