Erectile dysfunction: role of computed tomography cavernosography in the diagnosis and treatment planning of venous leak.
Computed tomography cavernosography
Erectile dysfunction
Venous incompetence
Venous leak
Journal
CVIR endovascular
ISSN: 2520-8934
Titre abrégé: CVIR Endovasc
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101738484
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Nov 2023
17 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
30
09
2023
accepted:
05
11
2023
medline:
17
11
2023
pubmed:
17
11
2023
entrez:
17
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Venous leak appears to be the most common cause of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED), which can be treated with venous embolization. Traditionally, conventional cavernosography was used for the diagnosis and treatment planning of venous leak. Recently, computed tomography (CT) cavernosography was introduced as a novel cross-sectional imaging method proposed to be advantageous over conventional cavernosography. We created a novel management algorithm for diagnosing venous leak including CT cavernosography as an imaging modality. In order to provide a broader basis for our management algorithm, a systematic literature review was conducted. In this article we systematically review relevant literature on using CT cavernosography for the diagnosis and treatment planning in ED patients with venous leak following the PRISMA selection process. Nine full-text articles were included in the review and assigned a level of evidence grade (all grade II). Two studies (2/9) compared the results of conventional cavernosography with those of CT cavernosography which was superior for site-specific venous leak identification (19.4% vs. 100%, respectively). CT cavernosography is a more detailed imaging method that is faster to perform, exposes the patient to less radiation, and requires less contrast material. In one study (1/9), CT cavernosography was used for diagnostic purposes only. Eight studies (8/9) cover both, diagnostic imaging and treatment planning including embolization (1/9) and sclerotherapy (2/9) of venous leak in patients with venogenic ED. Three studies (3/9) describe anatomical venous leak classifications that were established based on CT cavernosography findings for accurate mapping of superficial and/or deep venous leak and identification of mixed or more complex forms of venous leak present in up to 84% of patients. In addition to treatment planning, one study (1/9) used CT cavernosography also for follow-up imaging post treatment. CT cavernosography is superior to conventional cavernosography for diagnosis and treatment planning in patients with ED caused by venous leak (grade II levels of evidence). Consequently, CT cavernosography should be included in management algorithms for ED patients with suspected venous leak.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Venous leak appears to be the most common cause of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED), which can be treated with venous embolization. Traditionally, conventional cavernosography was used for the diagnosis and treatment planning of venous leak. Recently, computed tomography (CT) cavernosography was introduced as a novel cross-sectional imaging method proposed to be advantageous over conventional cavernosography. We created a novel management algorithm for diagnosing venous leak including CT cavernosography as an imaging modality. In order to provide a broader basis for our management algorithm, a systematic literature review was conducted.
MAIN BODY
METHODS
In this article we systematically review relevant literature on using CT cavernosography for the diagnosis and treatment planning in ED patients with venous leak following the PRISMA selection process. Nine full-text articles were included in the review and assigned a level of evidence grade (all grade II). Two studies (2/9) compared the results of conventional cavernosography with those of CT cavernosography which was superior for site-specific venous leak identification (19.4% vs. 100%, respectively). CT cavernosography is a more detailed imaging method that is faster to perform, exposes the patient to less radiation, and requires less contrast material. In one study (1/9), CT cavernosography was used for diagnostic purposes only. Eight studies (8/9) cover both, diagnostic imaging and treatment planning including embolization (1/9) and sclerotherapy (2/9) of venous leak in patients with venogenic ED. Three studies (3/9) describe anatomical venous leak classifications that were established based on CT cavernosography findings for accurate mapping of superficial and/or deep venous leak and identification of mixed or more complex forms of venous leak present in up to 84% of patients. In addition to treatment planning, one study (1/9) used CT cavernosography also for follow-up imaging post treatment.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
CT cavernosography is superior to conventional cavernosography for diagnosis and treatment planning in patients with ED caused by venous leak (grade II levels of evidence). Consequently, CT cavernosography should be included in management algorithms for ED patients with suspected venous leak.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37975993
doi: 10.1186/s42155-023-00403-9
pii: 10.1186/s42155-023-00403-9
pmc: PMC10656380
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
56Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jun 26;13(13):
pubmed: 37443571
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2023 May;46(5):610-616
pubmed: 36949182
Radiology. 1986 Dec;161(3):803-6
pubmed: 3786737
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jul;128(1):305-310
pubmed: 21701348
J Sex Med. 2011 May;8(5):1439-44
pubmed: 21366881
BJU Int. 1999 Jul;84(1):50-6
pubmed: 10444124
J Sex Med. 2021 Feb;18(2):315-326
pubmed: 33454205
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Feb 04;2:16003
pubmed: 27188339
Biosci Rep. 2017 May 11;37(3):
pubmed: 28424371
N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 15;342(24):1802-13
pubmed: 10853004
Br J Urol. 1991 May;67(5):517-21
pubmed: 2039921
J Urol. 1988 Jul;140(1):69-71
pubmed: 3379701
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 May;214(5):1112-1121
pubmed: 31990215
Eur Urol. 2021 Sep;80(3):333-357
pubmed: 34183196
J Sex Med. 2013 Jan;10(1):172-9
pubmed: 23171072
Int J Impot Res. 2008 Jan-Feb;20(1):17-29
pubmed: 17637789
J Urol. 2018 Sep;200(3):633-641
pubmed: 29746858
Int J Impot Res. 2000 Oct;12 Suppl 4:S6-S11
pubmed: 11035380
J Sex Med. 2016 Feb;13(2):144-52
pubmed: 26953829
BMC Urol. 2007 Sep 05;7:14
pubmed: 17803807
J Med Vasc. 2020 Feb;45(1):3-12
pubmed: 32057324
Front Physiol. 2023 Jan 09;13:1096741
pubmed: 36699684
BJU Int. 2011 Oct;108(8):1316-20
pubmed: 21332903
Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):674-80
pubmed: 25817916
Med J Aust. 2019 Jun;210(10):469-476
pubmed: 31099420
Radiology. 1982 Sep;144(4):781-5
pubmed: 7111724
Sci Am. 2000 Aug;283(2):70-5
pubmed: 10914402
J Sex Med. 2020 May;17(5):1041-1043
pubmed: 32146129
BJU Int. 2011 May;107(9):1442-6
pubmed: 20868388
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2535
pubmed: 19622551
Br J Radiol. 2018 Nov;91(1091):20180118
pubmed: 30028186
Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Apr;9(2):709-721
pubmed: 32420178
J Endovasc Ther. 2023 Jun 26;:15266028231183775
pubmed: 37365869
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2021 Mar;61(3):510-517
pubmed: 33067110
Int J Impot Res. 2008 Mar-Apr;20(2):192-8
pubmed: 17805336
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1988 Aug;11(4):211-7
pubmed: 3147135
CVIR Endovasc. 2022 Feb 3;5(1):10
pubmed: 35113281
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2019 Aug;30(8):1251-1258.e2
pubmed: 31104902
Eur Urol. 2005 Jul;48(1):136-9; discussion 139
pubmed: 15967263
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Feb 02;7:626943
pubmed: 33604356