Erectile Dysfunction A Prospective Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating the Effect of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (LI-ESWT) in Men With Erectile Dysfunction Following Radical Prostatectomy

Indirect assessment of low-intensity shockwave therapy's energy density and pulse frequency for erectile dysfunction: a systematic review, bayesian network meta-analysis and meta-regression

Shockwaves are thought to activate regenerative and angiogenic pathways, providing a possible therapeutic benefit for patients with erectile dysfunction. This study aimed to analyze the effectiveness of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy energy density and pulse frequency. In May 2022, a systematic search of online databases was performed to identify randomized clinical trials related to low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in erectile dysfunction. Eligible articles compared low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy to controls or sham procedures. A Bayesian framework with 200,000 Markov chains was performed. We included a total of 1272 patients from 18 studies. The energy flux density measured in joules included 0.09 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 3.2 IIEF [95% CrI 2.8, 3.6]), 0.15 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 4.9 IIEF [95% CrI 2.8, 7.2]) and 0.20 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 1.2 IIEF [95% CrI 0.11, 2.3]). Of these, 0.15 mJ/mm2 had the greatest ranking (SUCRA = 0.983) compared with placebo. When analyzed by pulse frequency, significant increases were found in 500 pulses/session (mean difference 2.5 IIEF [CrI 1.9, 3.2]), 1500 pulses/session (mean difference 4.6 IIEF [95% CrI 3.9, 5.4]) and > 3000 pulses/session (mean difference 3.1 IIEF [95% CrI 2.1, 4.2]). Of these, 1500 pulses/session had the highest SUCRA, at 0.996. Our network meta-analysis suggests that low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy is an effective intervention for erectile dysfunction, as measured by increases in the IIEF-EF. Sessions featuring 1500 pulses and an energy flux density of 0.15 mJ/mm2 appear to be the most effective.

Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Low Intensity Shockwave Therapy for the Treatment of Post-Radical Prostatectomy Erectile Dysfunction: "SHARP-ED TRIAL"

Introduction

Erectile Dysfunction (ED) is a common challenge post Radical Prostatectomy (RALP), affecting men's sexual health after undergoing definitive cancer therapy. Despite employing nerve-sparing techniques, ED remains a prevalent issue in this population. Studies indicate that approximately 70%-85% of men experience varying degrees of ED following RALP. The existing treatment landscape for post-RALP-ED presents limitations, and a discernible knowledge gap persists. To address this, our study aims to investigate the efficacy of Shockwave Therapy (SWT) as a potential intervention for managing ED after RALP.

Methods

This prospective, randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial aims to recruit 189 eligible patients post-RP and assess the effects of SWT. Comprehensive screening, including medical history, physical examinations, and biochemical evaluations, will be conducted to confirm eligibility. The intervention involves utilizing a device to administer focal shockwaves targeted at cavernosal tissue. Safety measures include continuous monitoring for adverse events and rigorous reporting protocols. The primary endpoint assesses changes in participants' ability to engage in penetrative intercourse from baseline to study completion, while secondary endpoints encompass various measures of erectile function, including questionnaire-based assessments, ultrasound parameters, and clinical outcomes.

Results

Statistical analysis, encompassing ANOVA for continuous variables and Fisher's exact test for categorical ones, will evaluate demographic characteristics, baseline data, and primary as well as secondary outcomes for statistical significance. Detailed analysis of trends, subgroup comparisons, and treatment effects will provide a comprehensive understanding of the impact of SWT on post-RP ED.

Conclusion

This study protocol represents a rigorous investigation into the potential therapeutic role of SWT in managing post-RP ED. The outcomes from this study aim to contribute valuable insights into the efficacy, safety, and potential improvements in erectile function following SWT, providing significant guidance for future interventions aimed at addressing this challenging condition affecting men's health and quality of life.

Variations in Low Intensity Shockwave Treatment Protocols for Erectile Dysfunction: A Review of the Literature and Guide to Offering Treatment

Low-intensity shockwave therapy (LiSWT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) continues to gain popularity in both clinical practice and the academic literature. The majority of trials and meta-analysis studies have shown LiSWT to be low risk with a trend toward positive improvements in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) scores. However, there is still debate over the clinical utility of LiSWT and there is no agreed upon optimal treatment protocol. In this review article we summarize published meta-analysis studies of LiSWT for ED, and review the treatment protocols from randomized sham-control trials published in the last 10 years. We found the most common device settings were an energy of 0.09 mJ/mm² and a frequency of 5 Hz. Shock number and location varied, but the most common protocol was 1,500 shocks per session, with 900 shocks to the penis (shaft, base, or hilum) and 600 shocks to the proximal corpora/crura. Protocols ranged from 4 to 12 treatment sessions. We also describe our institutional experience with LiSWT, including patient counseling and treatment protocol.

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

Background

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

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

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

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

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 (P < .05) and total IIEF-5 scores at 24 and 60 months (P < .05). The LIESWT group also had a significantly higher potency rate than the control group at 60 months (P < .05). For all time points after surgery, there were no significant differences between the LIESWT and PDE5i groups in terms of sexual function and total IIEF-5 scores and potency.

Clinical Implications

LIESWT may be a new option for penile rehabilitation in patients with erectile dysfunction after RARP.

Strengths and Limitations

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

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.

Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy for erectile dysfunction: Myths and realities

To review the evidence of clinical efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED). A search on PubMed using Medical Subject Headings terms [((low intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy) OR (Li-ESWT)) AND (erectile dysfunction)] was conducted in August 2022, to obtain studies on the use of Li-ESWT for the treatment of ED. Its success rate in terms of International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) score and Erection Hardness Score (EHS) improvement was recorded and analysed. A total of 139 articles were reviewed. Overall, 52 studies were included in the final review. 17 studies were on vasculogenic ED, 5 on post pelvic surgery ED, 4 specifically on ED in diabetic patients, 24 on non-specified origin ED and 2 on mixed pathophysiological origin ED. The mean age of patients was 55.87±7.91 (standard deviation) years and the duration of ED was 4.36±2.08 years. The mean IIEF-5 score went from 12.04±2.67 at baseline to 16.12±5.72, 16.30±3.26 and 16.85±1.63 respectively at 3, 6 and 12 months. The mean EHS went from 2.00±0.46 at baseline to 2.58±0.60, 2.75±0.46 and 2.87±0.16 respectively at 3, 6 and 12 months. Li-ESWT may be a safe and efficacy option for the treatment and cure of ED. Further studies are needed to assess which patients are more suitable for this procedure and which Li-ESWT protocol can lead to the best outcomes.

Radial wave therapy does not improve early recovery of erectile function after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a prospective trial

Background

Low intensity shockwave therapy is an emerging treatment option for men with vasculogenic erectile dysfunction. Radial wave therapy (rWT), which differs from focused shockwave (fSWT) as it produces lower pressure waves with lower peak energy, is used to treat soft tissue and skin conditions and has some data to support its use in vasculogenic erectile dysfunction. There is limited data for the use of rWT for the treatment of erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing (NS) radical prostatectomy. We report the first trial of rWT for penile rehabilitation after NS radical prostatectomy.

Methods

We performed a prospective, non-randomized, open-label trial. Men with good pre-operative erectile function who underwent a NS radical prostatectomy at our institution from 2018-2020 were considered for inclusion. We compared post-operative erectile function outcomes between the rWT (6 weekly treatments initiated approximately 2 weeks post-operatively) plus standard of care (phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor) arm and the non-sham controlled standard of care arm. The primary end point for our study was the proportion of men who returned to "near normal" erectile function, defined as IIEF-5 score ≥17 and erectile hardness score (EHS) ≥3, by 3 months post-operatively between the intervention and control arm. We also compared mean IIEF-5 scores and median EHSs between the arms.

Results

One hundred and six patients were enrolled, of whom 73 patients had at least one reported survey response between 6 and 12 weeks post-operatively. Five (17%) and 11 (26%) patients recovered erectile function in the control and intervention arms, respectively, which was not a statistically significant difference (P=0.37). However, the intervention arm did have a significantly higher median EHS compared to the control arm (1 vs. 2, P=0.03). There were 4 adverse events related to pain during treatment and required only treatment intensity de-escalation.

Conclusions

rWT is safe but did not substantially improve the recovery of early erectile function after NS radical prostatectomy.

Conservative Non-surgical Options for Erectile Dysfunction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This study aimed to review recent evidence on conservative non-surgical options for erectile dysfunction (ED) in men. A narrative review of the literature was performed. A comprehensive search in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases was done. Papers in English language, published from May 2017 until May 2022, were included. Papers reporting basic research or animal research were excluded, as long as reviews or meta-analyses. Congress reports, clinical cases, or clinical trials protocols with no results were also excluded.

RECENT FINDINGS

We found a multitude of different treatment modalities for ED. We must take into account the type of patient, their comorbidities, the origin of their ED, and its severity in order to reproduce effective results using these therapies. Some of the treatments show good results with a good level of evidence (new IPDE5 formulations, intracavernous injections, shock wave therapy, hormonal theraphy, psycho-sexual theraphy). However, others (some new molecules, stem cell theraphy, platelet-rich plasma injections, oxygenation-based therapy, nutraceuticals), although some of them present promising results, require randomized studies with a larger number of patients and a longer follow-up time to be able to establish firm recommendations. Regarding the conservative treatment of erectile dysfunction, in recent years, some therapies have been consolidated as effective and safe for certain types of patients. On the other hand, other treatment modalities, although promising, still lack the evidence and the necessary follow-up to be recommended in daily practice.

Low-intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for the Management of Postprostatectomy Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Context

Erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical prostatectomy is a concern for patients and their partners. Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) can potentially enhance tissue repair and regeneration. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the literature to assess the role of LI-ESWT in the management of patients with postprostatectomy ED.

Evidence acquisition

Two authors independently performed a systematic search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify all relevant articles. Non-English reports, case reports, reviews, letters, and editorials were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed according to the GRADE guidelines.

Evidence synthesis

Nine articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. All the studies included were published between 2015 and 2022 and the majority of them compared phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5Is) alone versus a combination of LI-ESWT and PDE5Is. Only three studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In general, there is no standardized protocol for LI-ESWT for postprostatectomy ED. In comparisons of LI-ESWT + PDE5Is versus PDE5Is alone, some authors found a statistically significant improvement in erectile function with LI-ESWT + PDE5Is. The starting time for LI-ESWT differed among the studies, ranging from 3 d to 6 mo after surgery. The main limitations of the review are the scarcity of studies, small sample sizes, high risk of bias, and high heterogeneity among studies.

Conclusions

There is currently limited evidence on the use of LI-ESWT either alone or in combination with PDE5Is in penile rehabilitation protocols after prostatectomy. However, small clinical trials with short follow-up show that LI-ESWT could potentially play a role in the management of postprostatectomy ED in the future. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed.

Patient summary

Despite limited reports in the literature, low-intensity shockwave therapy after removal of the prostate is a promising noninvasive treatment for dealing with erectile dysfunction after surgery.

Efficacy of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shock Wave Treatment in Erectile Dysfunction following Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a well-known complication of radical prostatectomy (RP). Oral 5-phosphodiesterase inhibitors are currently the most widely used penile rehabilitation treatment for ED following RP, but they are less effective than for those with general ED. Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave treatment (LI-ESWT), causing a biological change that induces neovascularization, has recently been used as a treatment for ED. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficiency of LI-ESWT in ED following RP. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up until December 2021. The endpoint was the change in IIEF scores after LI-ESWT. Five papers (460 patients) were included in the final analysis. In IIEF scores performed 3–4 months after LI-ESWT, the group receiving LI-ESWT showed statistically significantly better results than the control (WMD = −2.04; 95% CI, −3.72 to −0.35; p = 0.02). However, there were a total of two studies that measured the results after 9–12 months. There was no statistical difference between the two groups (WMD = −5.37; 95% CI, −12.42 to 1.69; p = 0.14). The results of this analysis indicate that LI-ESWT showed a statistically significant effect on early recovery in penile rehabilitation of ED following RP. However, the level of evidence was low. Therefore, careful interpretation of the results is required.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 16 Randomized Controlled Trials of Clinical Outcomes of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Treating Erectile Dysfunction

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED). From July 2011 to June 2021, we finally selected 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 1,064 participants to evaluate the efficacy of LI-ESWT in the treatment of ED from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The data are analyzed by Review Manager Version 5.4. Fifteen articles mentioned International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), in the follow-up of 1 month (mean difference [MD] = 3.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.38, 4.98], p = .0005), 3 months (MD = 3.01, 95% CI = [2.04, 3.98], p < .00001), and 6 months (MD = 3.20, 95% CI = [2.49, 3.92], p < .00001). After treatment, the improvement of IIEF in the LI-ESWT group was better than that in the control group. Besides, eight of the 16 trials provided data on the proportion of patients with baseline Erectile Hardness Score (EHS) ≤ 2 improved to EHS ≥ 3. The LI-ESWT group was also significantly better than the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] = 5.07, 95% CI = [1.78, 14.44], p = .002). The positive response rate of Questions 2 and 3 of the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) was not statistically significant (SEP2: OR = 1.27, 95% CI = [0.70, 2.30], p = .43; SEP3: OR = 4.24, 95% CI = [0.67, 26.83], p = .13). The results of this meta-analysis suggest that treatment plans with an energy density of 0.09 mJ/mm2 and pulses number of 1,500 to 2,000 are more beneficial to IIEF in ED patients. In addition, IIEF improvement was more pronounced in patients with moderate ED after extracorporeal shockwave therapy.