4.4 Article

Have rates of erectile dysfunction improved within the past 17years after radical prostatectomy? A systematic analysis of the control arms of prospective randomized trials on penile rehabilitation

期刊

ANDROLOGY
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 661-665

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/andr.12060

关键词

erectile dysfunction; International Index of Erectile Function; penile rehabilitation; radical prostatectomy; SEP3

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on case series, potency rates after radical prostatectomy (RPE) differ substantially and - furthermore - it remains unclear whether they have improved in more recent surgical series. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether potency rates after RPE have improved over the years. A systematic analysis of the control arms of all randomized controlled trials (RCT; n=11) on penile rehabilitation after RPE was carried out. In total, 2009 patients were included in these RCTs, 685 thereof in the respective control arms, who were either observed or received placebo. Assessment of erectile function in these studies was carried out by the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) or the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Eight trials used SEP3 as study endpoint. The rate of positive response to SEP3 (=erectile function sufficient for successful intercourse) in the control arms was 20% in 1997 (year of publication), 10% in 2003, 19% in 2004, 25% in 2008, 21% in 2010, 67% in 2011, 10% in 2013, and 22% in 2014. Eight RCTs assessed the IIEF-EF, yet results were not reported uniformly. In the control arms the IIEF-EF was 9.2 (year of publication 2003), 13.3 (2004), 8.8 (2008), 25% 22.0 (2008), 17.4 (2010), 58% 26.0 (2011), 9.3 (2013), and 11.6 (2014). Limitations of this analysis are a positive selection bias regarding patient recruitment, surgical approach, and the non-uniform inclusion and outcome criteria. This systematic analysis of the control arms of all RCTs on penile rehabilitation after nerve-sparing RPE shows (i) that the rate of undisturbed erectile function is in the range 20-25% in most studies and (ii) that these rates have not substantially improved or changed over the past 17years.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据