Cargando…

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction

BACKGROUND: Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) is an effective therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED) but is not widely recognized and applied. This prospective nonrandomized study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of Li-ESWT. METHODS: After a 4-week washout period o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lei, Qi, Wang, Dong, Liu, Chunhui, Ji, Zhigang, Yan, Su
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33718087
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1069
_version_ 1783663229984047104
author Lei, Qi
Wang, Dong
Liu, Chunhui
Ji, Zhigang
Yan, Su
author_facet Lei, Qi
Wang, Dong
Liu, Chunhui
Ji, Zhigang
Yan, Su
author_sort Lei, Qi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) is an effective therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED) but is not widely recognized and applied. This prospective nonrandomized study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of Li-ESWT. METHODS: After a 4-week washout period of past ED treatment, patients entered one of 2 active treatment groups, either 9-week Li-ESWT or 100 mg on-demand sildenafil. Patients were evaluated in the first- and third-month following initiation of treatment. The Li-ESWT protocol comprised 2 sessions per week for 3 weeks, which were repeated after a 3-week interval. Patients in the drug group took self-administered sildenafil at a dose of 100 mg before intercourse. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of Li-ESWT measured by the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) scores. Other measurements included erection hardness score (EHS) and Self-Esteem And Relationship (SEAR). RESULTS: A total of 78 participants completed the study (46 in the Li-ESWT group and 32 in the sildenafil group). Overall, 26.9% of the participants (21/78) included were psychogenic. In the third month, the outcome measured by IIEF-5 was 21.52 in the Li-ESWT group and 21.26 in the sildenafil group (P>0.05). Proportion of improvement defined by minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criteria was 52.2% in the Li-ESWT group and 59.4% in the sildenafil group (P>0.05). The EHS and SEAR improvement was similar in the 2 groups (P>0.05 at baseline and third month). Transient and mild adverse events were observed in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, a similar treatment efficacy and safety was shown by the application of Li-ESWT as on demand sildenafil.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7947449
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79474492021-03-12 Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction Lei, Qi Wang, Dong Liu, Chunhui Ji, Zhigang Yan, Su Transl Androl Urol Original Article BACKGROUND: Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) is an effective therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED) but is not widely recognized and applied. This prospective nonrandomized study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of Li-ESWT. METHODS: After a 4-week washout period of past ED treatment, patients entered one of 2 active treatment groups, either 9-week Li-ESWT or 100 mg on-demand sildenafil. Patients were evaluated in the first- and third-month following initiation of treatment. The Li-ESWT protocol comprised 2 sessions per week for 3 weeks, which were repeated after a 3-week interval. Patients in the drug group took self-administered sildenafil at a dose of 100 mg before intercourse. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of Li-ESWT measured by the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) scores. Other measurements included erection hardness score (EHS) and Self-Esteem And Relationship (SEAR). RESULTS: A total of 78 participants completed the study (46 in the Li-ESWT group and 32 in the sildenafil group). Overall, 26.9% of the participants (21/78) included were psychogenic. In the third month, the outcome measured by IIEF-5 was 21.52 in the Li-ESWT group and 21.26 in the sildenafil group (P>0.05). Proportion of improvement defined by minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criteria was 52.2% in the Li-ESWT group and 59.4% in the sildenafil group (P>0.05). The EHS and SEAR improvement was similar in the 2 groups (P>0.05 at baseline and third month). Transient and mild adverse events were observed in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, a similar treatment efficacy and safety was shown by the application of Li-ESWT as on demand sildenafil. AME Publishing Company 2021-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7947449/ /pubmed/33718087 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1069 Text en 2021 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Lei, Qi
Wang, Dong
Liu, Chunhui
Ji, Zhigang
Yan, Su
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title_full Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title_fullStr Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title_short Comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
title_sort comparison of the efficacy and safety of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus on-demand sildenafil for erectile dysfunction
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947449/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33718087
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1069
work_keys_str_mv AT leiqi comparisonoftheefficacyandsafetyoflowintensityextracorporealshockwavetherapyversusondemandsildenafilforerectiledysfunction
AT wangdong comparisonoftheefficacyandsafetyoflowintensityextracorporealshockwavetherapyversusondemandsildenafilforerectiledysfunction
AT liuchunhui comparisonoftheefficacyandsafetyoflowintensityextracorporealshockwavetherapyversusondemandsildenafilforerectiledysfunction
AT jizhigang comparisonoftheefficacyandsafetyoflowintensityextracorporealshockwavetherapyversusondemandsildenafilforerectiledysfunction
AT yansu comparisonoftheefficacyandsafetyoflowintensityextracorporealshockwavetherapyversusondemandsildenafilforerectiledysfunction