Surgical Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, oral pharmacotherapy is the dominant treatment for erectile dysfunction. AIM: The aim of this article is to give an up-to-date summary of the possibilities of surgical therapy. METHODS: A search of the literature over the last decade was performed. Relevant papers and guidelines on the topic were reviewed and included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We evaluate therapy options, such as penile vein surgery, arterial revascularization, and penile prosthetics. RESULTS: Vein surgery has faded into total insignificance due to the efficiency of oral and intracavernous therapeutics, and because of the known pathophysiology of corporal veno-occlusive dysfunction and the disappointing long-term results published in the literature. Penile revascularization surgery is performed today only in very limited number of patients with strict selection criteria such as age and exclusion of vascular risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Penile prosthetics is the only surgical therapy option maintaining its significance as a cure for erectile dysfunction. There are convincing long-term results with a high degree of patient and partner satisfaction, high patient acceptance, and a good functional durability of the mostly three-piece inflatable devices. Bertero EB and Antunes DL. Surgical treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Efficacy and tolerability of lodenafil carbonate for oral therapy of erectile dysfunction: a phase III clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: This is a phase III, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial on lodenafil carbonate (LC), a novel phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor developed in Brazil. AIM: Expanding information on LC efficacy and safety. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) erectile domain, positive answers to the sexual encounter profile (SEP)-2 and SEP-3 questions and incidence of adverse events (AEs). METHODS: A total of 350 men with erectile dysfunction (ED) of all degrees were randomized to placebo, LC 40 mg or LC 80 mg and followed for 4 weeks. They completed the IIEF and answered the SEP questions 2 and 3 after each intercourse without and with the use of LC. RESULTS: IIEF Erectile Domain scores without and with the use of medication were the following (mean [M] +/- standard deviation [SD]): placebo = 13.9 +/- 5.2 and 14.8 +/- 7.8; LC 40 mg = 13.6 +/- 5.3 and 18.6 +/- 8.0; LC 80 mg = 13.4 +/- 4.9 and 20.6 +/- 7.7 (analysis of variance [ANOVA] P < 0.01). Positive answers to SEP-2 without and with the use of medication were the following (M +/- SD): placebo = 55.3 +/- 43.2% and 52.1 +/- 41.4%; LC 40 mg = 46.4 +/- 44.3% and 63.5 +/- 42.0%; LC 80 mg = 50.2 +/- 40.9% and 80.8 +/- 32.3% (ANOVA P < 0.01). Positive answers to SEP-3 were the following: placebo = 20.2 +/- 32.3% and 29.7 +/- 38.1%; LC 40 mg = 19.6 +/- 34.3% and 50.8 +/- 44.4%; LC 80 mg = 20.8 +/- 33.2% and 66.0 +/- 39.3% (ANOVA P < 0.01). The patients with at least one AE were placebo = 28.7%, LC 40 mg = 40.9%, and LC 80 mg = 49.5%. AEs whose incidence was significantly higher with LC than with placebo included rhinitis, headache, flushing, visual disorder, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: LC showed a satisfactory efficacy-safety profile for oral therapy of ED.

Evaluating the efficiency of a combination of Pygeum africanum and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) extracts in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: In spite of its historical use, published data about phytotherapic products is characterized by the absence of well conducted studies, leading to conflictive and indefinite results about efficiency and safety of theses drugs. In that sense, we have analyzed the results of a combination of Pygeum africanum and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) extracts in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), based in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have selected, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, only patients with >or=50 years, presenting urinary symptoms assessed by the International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), with minimum score of 12, and Quality of Life (QoL) index of at least 3 points, rectal examination consistent with BPH, and maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) between 5 and 15 mL/s. Phytotherapic and placebo groups were formed by 27 and 22 patients, respectively. The major variables analyzed during the study were IPSS variation, Q(max), and side effects. Reduction of >or=30% and >or=50% in IPSS were the parameters used to define a clinically significant response (CSR). We have also analyzed >or=30% and >or=50% Q(max) increases. RESULTS: After six months of treatment we did not observe significant differences in clinical improvement potential between the phytotherapic combination and placebo groups. Percent IPSS drop of 21.6% in the phytotherapic group was similar to 19.7% obtained in the placebo group (p=0.928). Neither we observed any difference (p=0.530) for QoL improvement between phytotherapic (9.26%) and placebo (5.98%) groups. The alterations of Q(max) followed the trend line observed in clinical data, with no significant difference (p=0.463) in Q(max) increasing percent between phytotherapic (17.2%) and placebo (13.3%) groups. The CSR evaluation of clinical and urodynamic data was also similar between the groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of 25mg Pygeum africanum and 300mg stinging nettle extracts produced clinical and urodynamic effects similar to placebo in a group of HBP patients.