Male Sexual Dysfunctions in the Infertile Couple-Recommendations From the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM).

INTRODUCTION: Sexual dysfunctions (SDs) have been frequently reported among male partners of infertile couples due to psychogenic, relational and/or organic issues related with the inability to conceive. Likewise, male infertility (MI) could be a consequence of sexual dysfunctions. AIM: To review the evidence on the prevalence and treatment of male SDs in men of infertile couples and provide clinical recommendations on behalf of the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM). METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched in September 2019 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs), meta-analyses and open-label prospective or retrospective studies investigating the presence of erectile dysfunction (ED) and/or ejaculatory dysfunctions (EjDs) and/or low sexual desire (LSD) in conjunction with infertility. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The panel provided statements on: (i) Prevalence and association between SDs and MI; (ii) Treatment of male SDs in men of infertile couples. RESULTS: ED has been reported in 9% to 62% of male partners of infertile couples, with severe impairment observed in only 1% to 3% of ED cases. Moreover, worse semen parameters have been associated with greater ED severity. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5is) can be safely used to treat ED among patients seeking fatherhood. Male partners of infertile couples are at higher risk of premature ejaculation (PE). Retrograde ejaculation (RE) and anejaculation are a cause of MI and can be managed with electroejaculation (EEJ) or penile vibratory stimulation (PVS) or, alternatively, with oral treatments, however the latter with limited documented success. Low sexual desire has been reported by one third of men of infertile couples. CONCLUSION: ED could significantly affect male partners of infertile couple; PDE5is should be suggested to ensure an effective and satisfactory sexual relationship of the couple. Anejaculation and RE should be considered as a possible cause of MI and treated accordingly. Low sexual desire is frequently reported among men of infertile couple and could be a symptom of other systemic conditions or psychological distress. Capogrosso P, Jensen CFS, Rastrelli G, et al. Male Sexual Dysfunctions in the Infertile Couple-Recommendations From the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM). J Sex Med 2021;9:100377.

Low-Intensity Shock Wave Therapy in Sexual Medicine-Clinical Recommendations from the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM).

INTRODUCTION: Low-intensity shockwave therapy (LISWT) has been investigated for the treatment of uroandrological disorders including erectile dysfunction (ED), Peyronie's disease (PD) and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) with controversial findings. AIM: To review the evidence on LISWT for ED, PD, and CP/CPPS and provide clinical recommendations on behalf of the European Society of Sexual Medicine. METHODS: Medline and Embase databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs), meta-analyses and open-label prospective or retrospective studies investigating the effect of LISWT on ED, PD, or CP/CPPS. OUTCOMES: The panel provided statements on clinically relevant questions concerning LISWT: (i) treatment efficacy, (ii) treatment protocol, (iii) clinical indications, and (iv) safety. The level of evidence was provided according to the Oxford 2011 criteria and graded using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine recommendations. RESULTS: 11 RCTs and 5 meta-analyses investigated LISWT for ED. RCTs provided controversial results on the efficacy of LISWT and were affected by high heterogeneity and the small number of patients included. Pooled-data analysis showed an overall positive effect in terms of erectile function improvement but reported small estimates and included a largely heterogeneous cohort of patients. 4 RCTs and 1 meta-analysis assessed LISWT for PD. All trials showed positive findings in terms of pain relief but no effect on penile curvature and plaque size. Inclusion criteria vary widely among studies, and further investigation is needed. 5 RCTs investigated LISWT for CP/CPPS. Data showed a possible effect on pain relief, although there is no evidence supporting that pain relief was maintained or any improvement in pain over time. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: LISWT needs to be further investigated in the context of sexual medicine and is almost but not yet ready for clinical practice. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: All studies have been evaluated by a panel of experts providing recommendations for clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: LISWT is a safe and well-tolerated procedure but its efficacy for the treatment of ED is doubtful and deserves more investigation. Patients reporting pain associated with PD may benefit from LISWT, although no effect is expected on disease progression. LISWT is not a primary treatment for CP/CPPS, but it may be considered as an option to relieve pain. Capogrosso P, Frey A, Jensen CFS, et al. Low-Intensity Shock Wave Therapy in Sexual Medicine-Clinical Recommendations from the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM). J Sex Med 2019;16:1490-1505.

Active Surveillance Versus Radical Prostatectomy in Favorable-risk Localized Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) and radical prostatectomy (RP) are both accepted treatments for men with favorable-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) (ie, clinical tumor category 1-2b, Gleason Grade Group 1-2, and prostate-specific antigen < 20 ng/mL). However, head-to-head studies comparing oncologic outcomes and survival between these 2 treatment strategies are warranted. The objective of this study was to compare the use of prostate cancer treatments and PCa death in men managed on AS and men who underwent immediate RP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an observational study including 647 men on AS and 647 men treated with RP propensity score matched. We examined the 10-year cumulative incidence of salvage radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, castration-resistant PCa, and PCa death. RESULTS: The 10-year curative treatment-free survival for men on AS was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-65%). No differences in use of salvage radiotherapy (AS, 2.7%; 95% CI, 1.4%-4.1% vs. RP 5.4%; 95% CI, 3.4%-7.3%), hormonal therapy (AS, 6.9%; 95% CI, 4.4%-9.4% vs. RP, 4.1%; 95% CI, 2.5%-5.6%), developing castration-resistant PCa (AS, 1.7%; 95% CI, 0.5%-2.9% vs. RP, 2.0%; 95% CI, 0.7%-3.4%), or cumulative PCa mortality (AS, 0.4%; 95% CI, 0%-1.0% vs. RP, 0.5%; 95% CI, 0%-1.5%) were observed between the treatment strategies. The main limitation was the non-random allocation to treatment strategy. CONCLUSION: In this observational study on men with favorable-risk localized PCa, we found similar PCa mortality at 10 years between men on AS and men who underwent immediate RP. Moreover, there were no differences in the use of PCa therapies between the groups. Our study supports active surveillance as a treatment strategy for men with favorable-risk localized PCa.

Infections after transrectal ultrasonic guided prostate biopsies - a retrospective study.

Background: Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies (TRUSp) are associated with a risk of serious infections. Recently, there has been a rise in incidence of infections after TRUSp and quinolone-resistant bacteria. The most commonly used prophylaxis is ciprofloxacin (CFLX). Objective: To document the incidence and risk factors of post-TRUSp infections and investigate the microbial resistance patterns for the patients presenting with a serious infection after TRUSp. Materials and methods: Data were collected, including age, comorbidity, previous TRUSp, number of biopsies, previously received antibiotics, time between TRUSp and hospitalization, results of microbiological cultivations, antibiotic prophylaxis, and development of infection for all patients at The University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg who underwent TRUSp from November 2014 to November 2016. Results: In total, 590 patients were included and 37 (6.1%) patients were hospitalized with symptoms of infection. Of those 37 patients, 21 (56,8%) patients had positive microbiology (blood and/or urine), 18 (48.6%) patients were infected with E. coli and 11 (29.7%) patients had CFLX-resistant E. coli. If patients had previously received antibiotics, they had a significantly higher risk of developing infection after TRUSp (p = 0.01). Conclusion: Patients who have been exposed to antibiotics before TRUSp are at higher risk of developing serious infections as a complication to TRUSp. CFLX-resistant E. coli were a major reason for hospitalization.

Active Surveillance for Localized Prostate Cancer: Nationwide Observational Study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate nationwide survival outcomes in men with localized prostate cancer managed on active surveillance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 936 men with localized prostate cancer were initiated on active surveillance in Denmark in 2002 to 2012. Kaplan-Meier estimated curative treatment-free, hormonal therapy-free, castration resistant prostate cancer-free and cause specific survival was calculated. RESULTS: Prostate cancer was classified as very low risk in 223 men, low risk in 436, intermediate risk in 259 (87% were at favorable intermediate risk) and high risk in 18. Median followup was 7.5 years (IQR 6.1-9.1). Kaplan-Meier estimated 10-year curative treatment-free survival was 62.8% (95% CI 59.1-66.3), 10-year hormonal therapy-free survival was 92.2% (95% CI 89.2-94.4), 10-year castration resistant prostate cancer-free survival was 97.2% (95% CI 95.3-98.4) and 10-year cause specific survival was 99.6% (95% CI 98.6-99.9). Compared to men with low risk prostate cancer, those with intermediate risk prostate cancer had higher curative treatment-free survival (69% vs 56%, p = 0.008), lower hormonal therapy-free survival (88% vs 95%, p = 0.005) and similar castration resistant prostate cancer-free survival (95% vs 99%, p = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide cohort 10-year cause specific survival was similar to that in prospective active surveillance cohorts. Our study supports the use of active surveillance in men with localized prostate cancer, including men with favorable intermediate risk characteristics.

Prevalence and Predicting Factors for Commonly Neglected Sexual Side Effects to External-Beam Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Changes in sexual function other than erectile dysfunction are sparsely investigated after radiation therapy for prostate cancer. AIM: To investigate orgasmic dysfunction, urinary incontinence during sexual activity, changes in penile morphology, and sensory disturbances in the penis in patients with prostate cancer treated with external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). METHODS: In February 2015, men treated with EBRT at our center 3 months to 5 years previously (N = 519) received a study-specific questionnaire. This was developed from purpose-built questions and validated tools including the Erection Hardness Scale. All patients had received a radiation dose of 78 Gy. Androgen deprivation therapy was administered according to disease characteristics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measurements were prevalence rates and predictors of these side effects as identified by multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: One hundred nine patients were eligible (sexually active and had completed androgen deprivation therapy) for inclusion. Twenty-four percent reported anorgasmia, 44% reported a decreased intensity of their orgasms, and 40% reported that the time it took to reach orgasm had increased. Eleven percent reported anejaculation. Fifteen percent reported orgasm-associated pain. Only 4% reported urinary incontinence during sexual activity. Subjective penile length loss in excess of 1 cm was reported by 42%. Twelve percent reported an altered curvature of their penis after EBRT. Six percent reported painful erections. Twenty-seven percent reported decreased sensitivity in the penis after EBRT, 2% reported a cold sensation, and 2% reported paresthesia. Increasing time since final treatment increased the risk of penile sensory disturbances (odds ratio = 1.05; P = .028). CONCLUSION: Orgasmic dysfunction, changes in penile morphology, and sensory disturbances in the penis are common side effects of ERBT. Patients should be properly informed of the occurrence of these side effects before deciding which treatment to pursue. Frey A, Pedersen C, Lindberg H, et al. Prevalence and Predicting Factors for Commonly Neglected Sexual Side Effects to External-Beam Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. J Sex Med 2017;14:558-565.

Erectile function after radical prostatectomy: Do patients return to baseline?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess postprostatectomy erectile function compared to preoperative status by subjective patient perception and the abbreviated International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study used data from a prospectively collected database and a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study in patients following radical prostatectomy. Erectile function was assessed with the IIEF-5 and the question "Is your erectile function as good as before the surgery (yes/no)". Patients were included if they were sexually active before surgery and had at least 1 year of follow-up. The main outcome measure was the proportion of patients returning to self-perceived baseline erectile function. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients returning to baseline erectile function according to the IIEF-5 and predictors of return to baseline function. RESULTS: Questionnaires from 210 patients were available. Overall, 14 patients (6.7%) reported that their erections were as good as before surgery. Bilateral nerve-sparing was the only significant predictor of a return to baseline erectile function (p = 0.004). Forty-three patients (20.5%), who did not report use of erectile aids, showed no decline in IIEF-5 score. When including patients who used erectogenic aids, 69 (32.9%) maintained their preoperative IIEF-5 score. On multivariate analysis a low preoperative IIEF-5 score was a significant predictor of return to baseline IIEF-5 score (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Return to subjective baseline erectile function following radical prostatectomy is rare. The IIEF-5 questionnaire may not adequately reflect patients' experience. This should be considered in preoperative patient counselling.

Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of postprostatectomy erectile dysfunction: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate the effect and feasibility of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) as a treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who had undergone robot-assisted bilateral nerve-sparing RP more than a year before entering this pilot study, had no preoperative ED and were suffering from mild to severe postoperative ED were invited to participate. Six treatments were given over a 6 week period, using the Duolith® SD1 T-Top machine. The effect of the treatment was evaluated 1 month (t1) and 1 year (t2) after the final treatment. The main outcome measure was changes in the five-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were included in the study. However, two patients breached the protocol and consequently 16 patients were included in the analysis at t1 and 15 patients were included in the analysis at t2. At baseline the median age was 62 years (range 51 to 70 years) and the median time since surgery was 24 months (range 12 to 54 months). The median preoperative IIEF-5 score was 25 (range 22 to 25) and the median baseline IIEF-5 score was 9.5 (range 5 to 20). The median change in IIEF-5 scores was +3.5 (range -1 to 8; p = 0.0049) and +1 (range -3 to 14; p = 0.046) at t1 and t2, respectively. No severe side-effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: LI-ESWT may improve erectile function after bilateral nerve-sparing RP. Based on these results, further studies in patients with ED after nerve-sparing RP are justified.

[An active sex life is possible for men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer]. / Et aktivt sexliv kan være muligt under kastrationsbehandling for avanceret prostatacancer.

Sexual function is diminished in the majority of men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. However, about 20% seem to retain some degree of libido and erectile function. In addition, the intimacy of sexual relations is important for many couples. Therefore, sexuality should be addressed when patients express an interest in this. In some men, erections can be re-established with normal erectogenic aids. Others will benefit from counselling on alternative sexual practices. The goal should be to make the couple as satisfied as possible with their situation.

[Sexual side effects after radical prostatectomy are not limited to erectile dysfunction]. / Seksuelle bivirkninger ved radikal prostatektomi er mere end dårlig rejsningsfunktion.

Urinary incontinence (UI) during sexual activity, orgasmic dysfunction, and altered penile morphology are common sexual side effects after radical prostatectomy (RP). However, in spite of research showing that the vast majority of patients experience one or more of these problems, they are unknown to most clinicians. Daytime UI, non-nerve sparing surgery, and erectile dysfunction can help identify patients at risk. Prior to surgery, patients should be informed of the above-mentioned side effects. Patients with manifest symptoms after an RP may benefit from expert sexual counselling.

Prevalence and predicting factors for commonly neglected sexual side effects to radical prostatectomies: results from a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Altered perception of orgasm, orgasm-associated pain, penile sensory changes, urinary incontinence (UI) during sexual activity, penile shortening (PS), and penile deformity following radical prostatectomy (RP) have received increasing attention from researchers. AIM: The aim of this study is to describe the prevalence and predictors of the above-mentioned side effects. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study among men who had undergone RP between 3 and 36 months prior to study inclusion. Predicting factors were identified through logistic regression analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were prevalence rates of the above-mentioned side effects. RESULTS: Overall, 316 questionnaires were available for analyses. Of the sexually active patients (n = 256), 12 (5%) reported anorgasmia, whereas 153 (60%) reported decreased orgasm intensity. Delayed orgasms were reported by 146 (57%). Twenty-three patients (10%) had experienced pain during orgasm. UI during sexual activity were reported by 99 patients (38%). Out of the whole population, 77 patients (25%) reported sensory changes in the penis. A total of 143 patients (47%) reported a subjective loss of penile length of >1 cm. An altered curvature of the penis was reported by 30 patients (10%). Patients had increasing risk of UI during sexual activity (odds ratio [OR] 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.25) and orgasmic dysfunction (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01-1.16) with increasing International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire scores. Erectile dysfunction (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.07-3.10) and a high body mass index (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02-1.19) increased the risk of PS after RP. Nerve-sparing (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.16-0.95) reduced the risk of PS. CONCLUSIONS: Orgasm-associated problems, UI during sexual activity, penile sensory changes, PS, and penile deformity are common side effects to RP. Daytime UI, erectile dysfunction, and nerve-sparing status can help identify patients at risk.

Neglected side effects after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: A series of previously neglected sexually related side effects to radical prostatectomy (RP) has been identified over the recent years. These include orgasm-associated incontinence (OAI), urinary incontinence in relation to sexual stimulation (UISS), altered perception of orgasm, orgasm-associated pain (OAP), penile shortening (PS), and penile deformity. AIM: The aim of this article is to conduct a systematic review of the literature regarding the above-mentioned side effects. METHODS: A predefined search strategy was applied in a thorough search of Medline, Web of science, and the online Cochrane library. The PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were followed, and protocol as well as search strategies was registered at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/Prospero/ (RN: CRD42012003165). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measure was incidence rates for the relevant side effects. RESULTS: A total of 43 articles were included. OAI and UISS are experienced by 20-93% of RP patients at least a few times after surgery. Although these issues are associated to postoperative daytime incontinence, previous transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the only known predicting factor. Alterations of orgasmic function are experienced by approximately 80% after RP. Erectile dysfunction seems to play an important role in waning orgasmic function. OAP is only experienced by a subset of the patients with reported rates varying between 3% and 19%. Sparing of the tips of the seminal vesicles has been shown to double the risk of OAP. PS occurs in 15-68% of RP patients. Nerve sparing and preservation of erectile function may help preserve penile length. With regard to all side effects, studies indicate that they are reduced over time. CONCLUSIONS: The sexually related side effects summarized in this review are common after RP. Meanwhile, it is difficult to predict which patients are at risk. Daytime incontinence, previous TURP, a lack of nerve sparing, and erectile dysfunction are all associated with the above-mentioned sexually related side effects.