Long-term efficacy of penile rehabilitation with low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy for sexual and erectile function recovery following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a single-cohort pilot study.
erectile dysfunction
extracorporeal shockwave therapy
prostatic neoplasm
quality of life
robot-assisted surgery
Journal
Sexual medicine
ISSN: 2050-1161
Titre abrégé: Sex Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101631053
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2023
Apr 2023
Historique:
received:
31
12
2022
revised:
20
03
2023
accepted:
11
04
2023
medline:
25
5
2023
pubmed:
25
5
2023
entrez:
25
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The long-term efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LIESWT) for penile rehabilitation after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has not yet been reported. To assess the long-term efficacy of LIESWT for penile rehabilitation after RARP by evaluating the postoperative recovery of sexual and erectile functions following RARP. Patients who underwent RARP at our institution were categorized into 2 groups: those who received LIESWT and those who underwent penile rehabilitation with a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i). The control group included patients who did not undergo penile rehabilitation. Potency and scores on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for sexual function and 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) were evaluated preoperatively and over 60 months after RARP. The LIESWT group had significantly higher postoperative sexual function and total IIEF-5 scores and potency than the control group over the long term, and its results were not inferior to those of the PDE5i group. The LIESWT, PDE5i, and control groups comprised 16, 13, and 139 patients, respectively. As compared with the control group, the LIESWT group had significantly higher sexual function scores at 6, 12, and 60 months after surgery ( LIESWT may be a new option for penile rehabilitation in patients with erectile dysfunction after RARP. This pilot study was performed at a single center and involved relatively few patients, which may have led to selection bias. Furthermore, the selection of this study for penile rehabilitation was not made randomly but by the patient's choice. Despite these limitations, our results provide evidence in support of LIESWT for penile rehabilitation after RARP because this is the first study to assess the long-term efficacy of LIESWT. LIESWT can improve sexual and erectile functions in patients with erectile dysfunction after RARP, and its efficacy can be maintained over a long period after surgery.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The long-term efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LIESWT) for penile rehabilitation after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has not yet been reported.
Aim
UNASSIGNED
To assess the long-term efficacy of LIESWT for penile rehabilitation after RARP by evaluating the postoperative recovery of sexual and erectile functions following RARP.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Patients who underwent RARP at our institution were categorized into 2 groups: those who received LIESWT and those who underwent penile rehabilitation with a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i). The control group included patients who did not undergo penile rehabilitation. Potency and scores on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for sexual function and 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) were evaluated preoperatively and over 60 months after RARP.
Outcomes
UNASSIGNED
The LIESWT group had significantly higher postoperative sexual function and total IIEF-5 scores and potency than the control group over the long term, and its results were not inferior to those of the PDE5i group.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The LIESWT, PDE5i, and control groups comprised 16, 13, and 139 patients, respectively. As compared with the control group, the LIESWT group had significantly higher sexual function scores at 6, 12, and 60 months after surgery (
Clinical Implications
UNASSIGNED
LIESWT may be a new option for penile rehabilitation in patients with erectile dysfunction after RARP.
Strengths and Limitations
UNASSIGNED
This pilot study was performed at a single center and involved relatively few patients, which may have led to selection bias. Furthermore, the selection of this study for penile rehabilitation was not made randomly but by the patient's choice. Despite these limitations, our results provide evidence in support of LIESWT for penile rehabilitation after RARP because this is the first study to assess the long-term efficacy of LIESWT.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
LIESWT can improve sexual and erectile functions in patients with erectile dysfunction after RARP, and its efficacy can be maintained over a long period after surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37228769
doi: 10.1093/sexmed/qfad023
pii: qfad023
pmc: PMC10204648
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
qfad023Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society of Sexual Medicine.
Références
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010 Feb;8(2):162-200
pubmed: 20141676
Eur Urol. 2010 Aug;58(2):243-8
pubmed: 20451317
Int Urol Nephrol. 2018 Nov;50(11):2007-2014
pubmed: 30232721
CA Cancer J Clin. 2022 Jan;72(1):7-33
pubmed: 35020204
Int J Urol. 2010 Aug;17(8):689-97
pubmed: 20590940
Curr Drug Targets. 2015;16(5):459-73
pubmed: 25777276
J Urol. 2015 Mar;193(3):1052-9
pubmed: 25242394
Wound Repair Regen. 2009 Jul-Aug;17(4):522-30
pubmed: 19614917
Urology. 2002 Oct;60(4):569-72
pubmed: 12385908
Transl Androl Urol. 2015 Apr;4(2):110-23
pubmed: 26816818
Int J Urol. 2022 May;29(5):446-454
pubmed: 35133043
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1415-1424
pubmed: 27626136
Urology. 2000 Dec 20;56(6):899-905
pubmed: 11113727
J Sex Med. 2020 Apr;17(4):688-694
pubmed: 32007430
Am J Surg Pathol. 2016 Feb;40(2):244-52
pubmed: 26492179
Int J Impot Res. 2018 Feb;30(1):1-7
pubmed: 29180799
JAMA. 2018 May 8;319(18):1901-1913
pubmed: 29801017
World J Mens Health. 2016 Aug;34(2):73-88
pubmed: 27574591
Health Serv Res. 2021 Dec;56 Suppl 3:1441-1461
pubmed: 34350592
BJU Int. 2011 Sep;108(6 Pt 2):984-92
pubmed: 21917101
J Urol. 2021 Apr;205(4):1018-1030
pubmed: 33443457
Sex Med Rev. 2021 Jan;9(1):93-122
pubmed: 32499189
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 11;9(3):e91327
pubmed: 24618671
Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Aug;9(4):1559-1565
pubmed: 32944518
Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):418-30
pubmed: 22749850
BJU Int. 2008 Aug;102(4):426-31
pubmed: 18410431
J Sex Med. 2017 Dec;14(12):1496-1503
pubmed: 29122494
J Robot Surg. 2016 Sep;10(3):187-200
pubmed: 27251473
Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 2005 Nov;96(7):657-69
pubmed: 16363651
Int J Impot Res. 1999 Dec;11(6):319-26
pubmed: 10637462
J Urol. 1979 May;121(5):617-20
pubmed: 439257
Sex Med. 2021 Jun;9(3):100338
pubmed: 33789173
J Clin Med. 2022 May 14;11(10):
pubmed: 35628901