Double-blind, crossover comparison of 3 mg apomorphine SL with placebo and with 4 mg apomorphine SL in male erectile dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the efficacy and safety of a fixed, 3-mg dose of apomorphine SL compared with placebo, and to compare 3 mg with 4 mg apomorphine SL in patients with erectile dysfunction. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study included 296 heterosexual men with ED of various etiologies and severities. Two crossover groups were evaluated separately: 3 mg apomorphine SL vs. placebo (n = 194), and 3 vs. 4 mg apomorphine SL (n = 102). The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse; additional variables included the percentage of attempts resulting in intercourse and time to erection. Partner assessments were also analyzed. RESULTS: 3 mg apomorphine SL was significantly more effective than placebo (p<0.001) for the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse and resulting in intercourse, as assessed by both patients and partners. Median time to erection was 18.8 min. The 3-mg dose was not significantly different from 4 mg in the evaluation of efficacy variables, but the incidence of adverse events was higher with 4 mg. Nausea was the most common event, reported by 3.3% of patients on 3 mg vs. 14.1% on 4 mg; in the placebo comparison, nausea was reported by 7.0% of patients taking 3 mg apomorphine SL vs. 1.1% of those taking placebo. CONCLUSIONS: 3 mg apomorphine SL was significantly more effective than placebo and comparable to 4 mg, while offering an improved risk-benefit ratio.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose and dose-optimization regimens of sublingual apomorphine versus placebo in men with erectile dysfunction. The Apomorphine Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: A sublingual (SL) formulation of apomorphine has been developed and found effective in penile erectile dysfunction (ED). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of several doses of apomorphine SL in a dose-optimization schedule compared with placebo. METHODS: In this 8-week, multicenter, double-blind clinical trial, 569 patients were randomized to four groups: a dose-optimization group in which patients began with 2 mg, increased or decreased the dosage as needed for 4 weeks, and thereafter maintained an optimal dose for 4 weeks; two fixed-dose groups of either 5 or 6 mg; and a placebo group. Efficacy was assessed by patient and partner responses to home-use questionnaires about sexual function and activity and by responses to the International Index of Erectile Function and the Brief Sexual Function Inventory. RESULTS: In all apomorphine SL groups, a significantly higher percentage of patients compared with the placebo group achieved and maintained an erection firm enough for intercourse (48% to 53% versus 35% for placebo, P < or =0.001) and a significantly higher percentage of attempts resulted in intercourse (45% to 51% versus 33%, P < or =0.001). The responses to the questionnaires completed by the patients and partners were similar. Apomorphine SL was well tolerated; nausea, the most common side effect, was dose related and diminished substantially during the second 4-week period at all doses. The dose-optimization schedule resulted in fewer adverse events without impacting efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Apomorphine SL is an effective and safe treatment for ED, with 2 and 4 mg providing the most acceptable therapeutic index.

Role of urologist in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.

This report presents 7 patients with confirmed cases of multiple sclerosis (MS) in whom the diagnosis of MS was first suspected by the urologist. Review of these 7 cases identifies three factors that increased the suspicion of MS at the time of urologic evaluation: a history of neurologic symptoms, abnormalities on a brief neurologic examination, and abnormal basic urodynamic evaluation. Urologists attuned to the possible diagnosis of MS in patients who present with symptoms of voiding dysfunction can facilitate the proper diagnosis with a basic office evaluation.

Cross-sectional echocardiography. II. Analysis of mathematic models for quantifying volume of the formalin-fixed left ventricle.

Cross-sectional echocardiography was used to quantify volume in 21 canine left ventricles that were fixed in formalin and immersed in mineral oil. Area, length and diameter measurements were obtained from short- and long-axis cross-sectional images of the left ventricle and volume was calculated by seven mathematic models. Calculated volume was then compared, by linear regression and percent error analyses, with fluid volume of the left ventricle, obtained by filling the chamber with a known amount of fluid. Volumes ranged from 13-146 ml. Mathematic models using short-axis area and long-axis length gave higher correlation coefficients (r = 0.982 and r = 0.969) and lower mean errors (10-20%) than standard formulas previously used for M-mode echo and angiography. Thus, short-axis area analysis with cross-sectional echocardiography is well-suited for quantifying left ventricular volumes in dogs.