Cargando…

Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?

BACKGROUND: In the evaluation of men presenting for erectile dysfunction (ED), specific diagnostic tests, such as an intracavernous injection test (IIT) with Erection Hardness Score (EHS) assessment or penile Doppler ultrasound (PDU), may be necessary. AIM: The study sought to compare the prognostic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Alberto Costa, Silva, Carlos Martins, Morgado, Afonso
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10028335/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36960301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfad009
_version_ 1784909927972601856
author Silva, Alberto Costa
Silva, Carlos Martins
Morgado, Afonso
author_facet Silva, Alberto Costa
Silva, Carlos Martins
Morgado, Afonso
author_sort Silva, Alberto Costa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the evaluation of men presenting for erectile dysfunction (ED), specific diagnostic tests, such as an intracavernous injection test (IIT) with Erection Hardness Score (EHS) assessment or penile Doppler ultrasound (PDU), may be necessary. AIM: The study sought to compare the prognostic value of PDU parameters with erection rigidity with EHS during IIT in predicting refractory ED after 5 years. METHODS: Patients referred for ED were evaluated and had a PDU with at least 15 μg of intracavernous alprostadil and without any sexual stimulation. At 5 years of follow-up, current and past ED treatments were noted. Refractory ED was defined as having a penile prosthesis (PP) implanted, having failed nonsurgical treatments but having refused PP implantation, or having discontinuation of nonsurgical treatments due to loss of efficacy. Patients with hypogonadism and pelvic surgery were excluded. Receiver-operating characteristic curves were drawn and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. OUTCOMES: The outcome was the AUC for predicting refractory ED. RESULTS: At 5 years, 69 men were still in follow-up with a mean age of 58.47 ± 10.39 years, and 13 (18.8%) were classified as having refractory ED. The AUC for the EHS, peak systolic velocity, end-diastolic flow, and resistive index to discriminate refractory ED were 0.820, 0.613, 0.730, and 0.714, respectively. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: EHS can be a good predictor of response to nonsurgical treatments in ED. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This was a prospective study to compare IIT with PDU, and validated disease-specific questionnaires were used to assess both clinical efficacy and satisfaction. PDU was performed by a blinded third party. However, resulting from a single-center study, our sample size can be considered small, and the number of events observed was also low. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that an abnormal EHS during an IIT is, at least, noninferior than an abnormal PDU in predicting those patients that will not respond to nonsurgical treatments and that will need a PP in long-term.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10028335
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100283352023-03-22 Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction? Silva, Alberto Costa Silva, Carlos Martins Morgado, Afonso Sex Med Erectile Dysfunction BACKGROUND: In the evaluation of men presenting for erectile dysfunction (ED), specific diagnostic tests, such as an intracavernous injection test (IIT) with Erection Hardness Score (EHS) assessment or penile Doppler ultrasound (PDU), may be necessary. AIM: The study sought to compare the prognostic value of PDU parameters with erection rigidity with EHS during IIT in predicting refractory ED after 5 years. METHODS: Patients referred for ED were evaluated and had a PDU with at least 15 μg of intracavernous alprostadil and without any sexual stimulation. At 5 years of follow-up, current and past ED treatments were noted. Refractory ED was defined as having a penile prosthesis (PP) implanted, having failed nonsurgical treatments but having refused PP implantation, or having discontinuation of nonsurgical treatments due to loss of efficacy. Patients with hypogonadism and pelvic surgery were excluded. Receiver-operating characteristic curves were drawn and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. OUTCOMES: The outcome was the AUC for predicting refractory ED. RESULTS: At 5 years, 69 men were still in follow-up with a mean age of 58.47 ± 10.39 years, and 13 (18.8%) were classified as having refractory ED. The AUC for the EHS, peak systolic velocity, end-diastolic flow, and resistive index to discriminate refractory ED were 0.820, 0.613, 0.730, and 0.714, respectively. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: EHS can be a good predictor of response to nonsurgical treatments in ED. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This was a prospective study to compare IIT with PDU, and validated disease-specific questionnaires were used to assess both clinical efficacy and satisfaction. PDU was performed by a blinded third party. However, resulting from a single-center study, our sample size can be considered small, and the number of events observed was also low. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that an abnormal EHS during an IIT is, at least, noninferior than an abnormal PDU in predicting those patients that will not respond to nonsurgical treatments and that will need a PP in long-term. Oxford University Press 2023-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10028335/ /pubmed/36960301 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfad009 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society of Sexual Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Erectile Dysfunction
Silva, Alberto Costa
Silva, Carlos Martins
Morgado, Afonso
Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title_full Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title_fullStr Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title_full_unstemmed Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title_short Erection hardness score or penile Doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
title_sort erection hardness score or penile doppler ultrasound: which is a better predictor of failure of nonsurgical treatment of erectile dysfunction?
topic Erectile Dysfunction
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10028335/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36960301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sexmed/qfad009
work_keys_str_mv AT silvaalbertocosta erectionhardnessscoreorpeniledopplerultrasoundwhichisabetterpredictoroffailureofnonsurgicaltreatmentoferectiledysfunction
AT silvacarlosmartins erectionhardnessscoreorpeniledopplerultrasoundwhichisabetterpredictoroffailureofnonsurgicaltreatmentoferectiledysfunction
AT morgadoafonso erectionhardnessscoreorpeniledopplerultrasoundwhichisabetterpredictoroffailureofnonsurgicaltreatmentoferectiledysfunction