Efficacy and safety of transurethral alprostadil in patients with erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: A retrospective analysis of the MUSE clinical trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transurethral alprostadil in patients with erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received doses of transurethral alprostadil in the clinic and those for whom a suitable dose was determined were treated at home with active drug or placebo for 3 months. Patients had undergone radical prostatectomy no less than 3 months before study entry. RESULTS: Of the 384 patients in whom radical prostatectomy was identified as a cause of erectile dysfunction 70.3% had an erection believed sufficient for intercourse in the clinic and 57.1% on active medication had sexual intercourse at least once at home. The product of clinic and home success rates (70.3 x 57.1%) was an overall success rate (the likelihood of active treatment to lead to intercourse at home) of 40.1%. The frequency of most adverse effects of radical prostatectomy was comparable to that of other organic etiologies of erectile dysfunction (1,127 patients). The percentage of patients with hypotension in the clinic was lower after radical prostatectomy compared to other erectile dysfunction etiologies (0.8 versus 4.2%, p < 0.001) but the percentage of patients with urethral pain/burning was higher (18.3 versus 10.4%, p = 0.027). No urinary tract infection, fibrosis or priapism occurred in the post-radical prostatectomy patients. CONCLUSIONS: Transurethral alprostadil is a well tolerated and efficacious method of treating erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy, although psychological changes associated with cancer and surgery may limit home response. The severe neurovascular deficit associated with prostatectomy neither limits the efficacy of transurethral alprostadil nor increases the risks.

Erectile response to transurethral alprostadil, prazosin and alprostadil-prazosin combinations.

PURPOSE: Transurethral alprostadil has been shown to be efficacious in many men with erectile dysfunction. We compared transurethral alprostadil and prazosin alone, and in combination to treat this disorder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo controlled study the erectile responses to transurethral alprostadil, prazosin and alprostadil-prazosin combinations were assessed in 234 men 26.8 to 81.5 years old with complete organic erectile dysfunction. Patients self-administered a random sequence of 7 doses in the clinic in 4 weeks. The erectile response was assessed using categorical and visual analog scales. RESULTS: Full penile enlargement or rigidity was achieved by 165 of the 234 men (70.5%) after at least 1 active dose of medication. The most effective alprostadil dose (500 microg.) resulted in full penile enlargement or rigidity in 51.8% of administrations, whereas the most effective prazosin dose (2,000 microg.) and placebo resulted in a similar response in 12.7 and 2.7%, respectively (p <0.001). The 500/2,000 microg. alprostadil/prazosin combination, which resulted in full enlargement or rigidity in 58.9% of doses, was only slightly better than the most effective dose of alprostadil alone (500 microg.). However, combinations of 125/500 and 250/500 microg. alprostadil/prazosin were more effective (p <0.01) than 125 and 250 microg. alprostadil given alone, respectively. The most common side effect of therapy was penile pain, which rarely led to study discontinuation. Hypotension most commonly developed at the higher alprostadil-prazosin combination. CONCLUSIONS: Transurethral alprostadil and alprostadil-prazosin combinations produced erections in men with complete organic erectile dysfunction. This combination therapy may be an option in patients who do not respond to transurethral alprostadil alone.