RESUMO
PURPOSE: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis on the safety and efficacy of endovascular therapy in the treatment of the two most common etiologies of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED): veno-occlusive dysfunction (VOD) and arterial insufficiency (AI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases were searched for published English literature regarding endovascular ED treatments. Case series (n ≥ 3) were included. Multiple data points were obtained, including demographic data, etiology, diagnosis method, imaging studies, treatment approach, technical success, clinical success, complications, and follow-up. RESULTS: Sixteen relevant articles were obtained and a total of 212 patients with VOD and 162 with AI were identified. The VOD cohort were treated either percutaneously (60.4%; n = 128) or after surgical exposure of the deep dorsal vein (33.5%, n = 71), or it was unspecified (6.1%; n = 13). The most common embolic used was n-butyl cyanoacrylate (51.9%; n = 109). Meta-analysis found an overall clinical success rate of 59.8% in VOD patients. Complications occurred in 5.2% of patients (n = 11), with 9 considered to be mild and 2 considered to be severe. The AI cohort contained 162 patients most commonly treated via stenting of the internal pudendal artery (40.1%; n = 65). Meta-analysis found an overall clinical success rate of 63.2% in AI patients. Complications occurred in 4.9% of patients (n = 8), with 4 considered to be mild and 4 considered to be severe. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy for medically refractory ED is safe and may provide a treatment alternative to more invasive surgical management; however, conclusions are limited by the heterogeneity of clinical success definitions among the included studies.