Conservative and medical treatments of non-sickle cell disease-related ischemic priapism: a systematic review by the EAU Sexual and Reproductive Health Panel.

Conservative and medical treatments are considered the first step in ischemic priapism (IP) management, although there is no clear evidence regarding their efficacy. We conducted a systematic review on behalf of the EAU Guidelines panel on Sexual and Reproductive health to analyse the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of conservative and medical treatment for non-sickle cell disease-related IP. Databases searched for relevant literature investigating efficacy and safety of conservative measures and medical treatment for IP included Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Libraries and clinicaltrial.gov published up to September 2021. Overall, 41 retrospective, 3 prospective single-arm studies and 3 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Intracavernous injection with sympathomimetic (ICIs) agents were the most frequently utilized treatment with efficacy ranging from 0 to 100% of cases. The combination of ICIs with corporeal aspiration with or without irrigation with saline was successful in 70 to 100% of cases. Oral treatment with ß2 receptor agonist (e.g., terbutaline) showed mild to moderate efficacy. Conservative methods including ice pack, exercise, cold enema and ejaculation depicted lower effectiveness in resolving priapism (1-55%). Longer time interval from the onset to the resolution of IP was associated with higher rate of erectile dysfunction at follow-up (30-70%), especially after 24 h.

Clinical Efficacy of Serenoa repens Versus Placebo Versus Alpha-blockers for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/Benign Prostatic Enlargement: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Placebo-controlled Clinical Trials.

CONTEXT: International guidelines do not make any specific recommendations on Serenoa repens (SeR) for the treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE), due to product heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the published trials and meta-analyses. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of hexanic extract of SeR (HESr) versus non-HESr (nHESr) versus placebo versus alpha-blockers (ABs) in patients affected by LUTS secondary to BPE through a network meta-analysis method. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The search was conducted until December 31, 2018 using Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases without restriction. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one comparison between SeR, ABs, or placebo for the treatment of LUTS/BPE. Outcomes of the study were the mean change in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and peak flow (PF). This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018084360). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 2115 articles were identified. After the global assessment, 22 RCTs matched with the inclusion criteria, including 8564 patients. For IPSS, the mean efficacies against placebo were +0.48 and -1.69 for HESr and nHESr, respectively, at 3 mo; 0.59 for nHESr at 6 mo; and -1.31 and -3.30 for nHESr and HESr, respectively, at 12 mo. For PF, the mean efficacies against placebo were +0.53 and +2.82 for HESr and nHESr, respectively, at 3 mo; +1.85 for nHESr at 6 mo; and +4.05 and +5.52 for HESr and nHESr, respectively, at 12 mo. Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve rankograms, terazosin showed the highest score (99.6%), while alfuzosin, tamsulosin, silodosin, HESr, and nHESr showed scores of 53.7%, 42.3%, 68.5%, 36.7%, and 47.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this network meta-analysis, we demonstrated that SeR did not show clinically meaningful improvement in LUTS and PF. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the present study, we found no clinically meaningful improvement of Serenoa repens for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic enlargement. The analysis showed that the benefit over placebo was minimal and may not justify its clinical use before higher level of evidence will be available.

Therapeutic Effects of Micronutrient Supplements on Sperm Parameters: Fact or Fiction?

BACKGROUND: Despite the limited evidence about the effect of micronutrient supplementation on the semen quality, many micronutrient supplements have been used to improve male fertility. Approximately, 40%- 50% of male infertility cases in general and up to 80% in men with idiopathic infertility cases are caused by oxidative stress and decreased level of seminal total antioxidant capacity. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the beneficial effects of micronutrient supplementation on sperm concentration, motility and morphology. METHODS: A PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase data, Web of Science and Cochrane Library database extensive research of the randomized controlled studies utilizing micronutrient vitamins and supplements was performed. RESULTS: The existent international literature is rather heterogeneous and a definitive is difficult to be drawn. Several micronutrients have beneficial effects on sperm parameters. Rational use of micronutrients might be helpful for infertile patients. CONCLUSION: Further randomized, controlled clinical trials are required to elucidate the efficacy and safety of micronutrients and propose proper protocols for their use. A well-rounded, balanced diet is more preferable than the widespread use of micronutrient supplements beyond the recommended doses. Future studies should concern the pregnancy rate as a primary outcome in their designs. Further research should be done to determine the appropriate antioxidant compounds, the duration of the treatment, as well as a certain dose of antioxidants in clinical practices. The pre-treatment evaluation of the seminal oxidative status is also an important parameter to proceed with micronutrient supplementation without the risk of reductive stress. Under these conditions, supplements could support the quality of sperm and help to alleviate male infertility.