4.2 Article

Oral phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors and priapism: A VigiBase analysis

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pds.5721

关键词

cialis; erectile dysfunction; phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor; priapism; sildenafil; tadalafil; viagra

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of PDE5i drugs shows a weaker disproportionality signal for priapism events compared to intracavernousal drugs. The highest reporting odds ratio (ROR) for all PDE5i agents is observed in the 12-17 years age group (9.49, 95% CI: 3.76-19.93), followed by the 2-11 years group (4.31, 95% CI: 1.57-9.4).
Purpose: To explore the differences of priapism events among a diverse cohort taking erectogenic medicines (i.e., phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors [PDE5i] and intracavernousal drugs).Methods: We queried the World Health Organization global database of individual case safety reports (VigiBase) for records of the adverse drug reactions (ADR) with sildenafil, tadalafil, avanafil, vardenafil, papaverine, and alprostadil. Disproportionality analyses (case/non-case approach) were performed to assess the reporting odds ratio (ROR) of priapism reporting in PDE5i consumers compared to intracavernousal drug recipients.Results: From a total of 133 819 ADR events for erectogenic medications, 632 were priapism (PDE5is: n = 550, 0.41%; intracavernousal drugs: n = 82, 9.92%). Priapism disproportionality signals from intracavernousal drugs were 25 times stronger than PDE5is (ROR = 34.7; confidence interval [CI] 95%: 27.12-43.94 vs. ROR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.24-1.54). For all PDE5i agents, the 12-17 years age group had the highest ROR (9.49, 95% CI: 3.76-19.93) followed by 2-11 years (4.31, 95% CI: 1.57-9.4). Disproportionality signals for consumers under 18 for both all PDE5is as a whole (ROR = 4.57, 95% CI: 2.48-7.73) and sildenafil (ROR = 4.89, 95% CI: 2.51-8.62) were stronger than individuals 18 or older (ROR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.93-1.21 and ROR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.91-1.26, respectively).Conclusions: PDE5i use shows disproportionate priapism signals which are higher in young patients.

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

4.2
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