4.3 Article

Erectile dysfunction and hypogonadism among men with HIV

期刊

AIDS PATIENT CARE AND STDS
卷 21, 期 1, 页码 9-19

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/apc.2006.0071

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Erectile dysfunction (ED) and hypogonadism are increasingly recognized conditions, however, the prevalence and etiologies of these conditions among HIV-infected men remain unclear. We studied 300 HIV-infected men who completed standardized questionnaires regarding sexual function and hypogonadal symptoms. An early morning testosterone test was performed; patients with a low serum testosterone level ( defined by < 300 ng/dL), underwent additional blood tests to determine the etiology of the hypogonadism. The participants' mean age was 39 years ( range, 19-72); 61% were Caucasian; 24%, African American; 9%, Hispanic; and 5% other. Participants had been HIV-positive for a mean of 9 years ( range, 0.5-20) with a mean CD4 count of 522 cells/mm(3) ( range, 1-1531). Sixty percent were receiving antiretroviral therapy. ED was reported by 61.4%; of those with ED, 32% did not have a rigid enough erection for penetration, and 46% were unable to sustain an erection for the completion of intercourse. In the multivariate analysis, increasing age ( odds ratio [ OR] 1.4 for a 5-year increment, p < 0.001) and depression ( OR 2.64, p < 0.0001) were associated with ED. A higher current CD4 count was protective ( OR 0.80 for each 100 cells/mm(3), p = 0.004). Only 25% of patients with ED had utilized a phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor for treatment. Seventeen percent of the 300 men were hypogonadal; there was no correlation between hypogonadism and ED. Increasing age and a higher body mass index (BMI) were positively associated with hypogonadism, while smoking was negatively associated ( OR 0.44, p = 0.02). All patients with low testosterone had secondary hypogonadism. There was no association between ED or hypogonadism with the current, past, or cumulative use of HIV medications.

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

4.3
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