Dataset Information

Erectile dysfunction and penile rehabilitation after pelvic fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate the rate of erectile dysfunction (ED) after pelvic ring fracture (PRF).

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic literature search of the Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science Library databases was conducted in January 2020. Included were original studies performed on humans assessing ED after PRF according to the 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) questionnaire and fracture classification following Young and Burgess, Tile or Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association. Furthermore, interventional cohort studies assessing the effect of penile rehabilitation therapy with phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors (PDE-5-I) on IIEF-5 scores compared before and after treatment were included. Results were presented as forest plots of proportions of patients with ED after PRF or mean changes on IIEF-5 questionnaires before and after penile rehabilitation. Studies not included in the quantitative analysis were narratively summarised. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the revised tool for the Quality Assessment on Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.

Results

The systematic literature search retrieved 617 articles. Seven articles were included in the qualitative analysis and the meta-analysis. Pooled proportions revealed 37% of patients with ED after suffering any form of PRF (result on probability scale pr=0.37, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.50). Patients after 3 months of penile rehabilitation therapy reported a higher IIEF-5 score than before (change score=6.5 points, 95% CI: 2.54 to 10.46, p value=0.0013).

Conclusion

Despite some heterogeneity and limited high-quality research, this study concludes that patients suffering from any type of PRF have an increased risk of developing ED. Oral intake of PDE-5-I for the purpose of penile rehabilitation therapy increases IIEF-5 scores and may relevantly influence quality-of-life in these patients.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020169699.

SUBMITTER: Schmid FA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8166614 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients complaining of short penile length pose a challenge in urology practice. Those men who present seeking penile lengthening surgery usually overestimate 'normal' penile length, and may in often cases relate their penile length with the degree of masculinity and self-esteem. Penile prosthetic devices are the gold standard treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) after failure of conservative options. Penile shortening is the most prevalent long-term complaint after successful inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. This has a significant impact on patient's overall satisfaction and quality of life. Using PubMed, we performed a thorough literature review of the current procedures of preservation or enhancement of penile length as well as reported perioperative protocols in patients undergoing penile prosthesis (PP) insertion. Keywords used were "penile lengthening", "penile enhancement", "penile girth", "inflatable penile prosthesis" and "glans augmentation". Several surgical techniques can be offered in the setting of penile shortening concurrently with PP insertion, e.g., sub-coronal approach of PP placement, sliding technique, modified sliding technique (MoST), multiple-slide technique (MuST), and tunica mesh expansion procedure (TMEP). Adjuvant techniques can also improve subjective penile length include, ventral phalloplasty, suprapubic lipectomy, suspensory ligament release and use of expanding penile implants. Preoperative protocols including use of a vacuum erectile device, traction therapy also seem to improve postoperative outcomes, minimizing postoperative pain, and encouraging the early device use. Currently, there is no consensus among experts on a particular lengthening procedure or when they can be performed to optimize outcomes. Furthermore, it is imperative to set proper expectations before surgery, with extensive patient and partner counseling. When used in the properly selected patient, penile lengthening procedures show promising results with minimal complication rates.

Project description:ImportanceCombining 2 first-line treatments for erectile dysfunction (ED) or initiating other modalities in addition to a first-line therapy may produce beneficial outcomes.ObjectiveTo assess whether different ED combination therapies were associated with improved outcomes compared with first-line ED monotherapy in various subgroups of patients with ED.Data sourcesStudies were identified through a systematic search in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus from inception of these databases to October 10, 2020.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials or prospective interventional studies of the outcomes of combination therapy vs recommended monotherapy in men with ED were identified. Only comparative human studies, which evaluated the change from baseline of self-reported erectile function using validated questionnaires, that were published in any language were included.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction and synthesis were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.Main outcomes and measuresA meta-analysis was conducted that included randomized clinical trials that compared outcomes of combination therapy with phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors plus another agent vs PDE5 inhibitor monotherapy. Separate analyses were performed for the mean International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score change from baseline and the number of adverse events (AEs) by different treatment modalities and subgroups of patients.ResultsA total of 44 studies included 3853 men with a mean (SD) age of 55.8 (11.9) years. Combination therapy compared with monotherapy was associated with a mean IIEF score improvement of 1.76 points (95% CI, 1.27-2.24; I2 = 77%; 95% PI, -0.56 to 4.08). Adding daily tadalafil, low-intensity shockwave therapy, vacuum erectile device, folic acid, metformin hydrochloride, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors was associated with a significant IIEF score improvement, but each measure was based on only 1 study. Specifically, the weighted mean difference (WMD) in IIEF score was 1.70 (95% CI, 0.79-2.61) for the addition of daily tadalafil, 3.50 (95% CI, 0.22-6.78) for the addition of low-intensity shockwave therapy, 8.40 (95% CI, 4.90-11.90) for the addition of a vacuum erectile device, 3.46 (95% CI, 2.16-4.76) for the addition of folic acid, 4.90 (95% CI, 2.82-6.98) for the addition of metformin hydrochloride and 2.07 (95% CI, 1.37-2.77) for the addition of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. The addition of α-blockers to PDE5 inhibitors was not associated with improvement in IIEF score (WMD, 0.80; 95% CI, -0.06 to 1.65; I2 = 72%). Compared with monotherapy, combination therapy was associated with improved IIEF score in patients with hypogonadism (WMD, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.99-2.23; I2 = 0%), monotherapy-resistant ED (WMD, 4.38; 95% CI, 2.37-6.40; I2 = 52%), or prostatectomy-induced ED (WMD, 5.47; 95% CI, 3.11-7.83; I2 = 53%). The treatment-related AEs did not differ between combination therapy and monotherapy (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.66-1.85; I2 = 78%). Despite multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses, the levels of heterogeneity remained high.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that combination therapy of PDE5 inhibitors and antioxidants was associated with improved ED without increasing the AEs. Treatment with PDE5 inhibitors and daily tadalafil, shockwaves, or a vacuum device was associated with additional improvement, but this result was based on limited data. These findings suggest that combination therapy is safe, associated with improved outcomes, and should be considered as a first-line therapy for refractory, complex, or difficult-to-treat cases of ED.