A model for managing erectile dysfunction following prostate cancer treatment

Post-Radical Prostatectomy Erectile Dysfunction Assessed Using the IIEF-5 Questionnaire - A Systematic Literature Review

Erectile dysfunction is common postoperative complication after radical prostatectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate erectile dysfunction among the population of men who have undergone radical prostatectomy. Finally, 21 articles are included in the current qualitative analysis. The results suggest that recovery in potency occurs after 12 months after surgery, and that different adjuvant treatment can be used to accelerate recovery and increase effectiveness. However, conclusions are not derived from all the selected articles, but are rather based on those which present clear numerical scores according to the IIEF-5 questionnaire.

Prevention and management of post prostatectomy erectile dysfunction

Sexual dysfunction is common in patients with prostate cancer (PC) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Review the available literature concerning prevention and management strategies for post-RP erectile function (EF) impairment in terms of preoperative patient characteristics, intra and postoperative factors that may influence EF recovery, and postoperative treatments for erectile dysfunction (ED). A literature search was performed using Google and PubMed database for English-language original and review articles, either published or e-published up to July 2013. The literature still demonstrates a great inconsistency in the definition of what is considered normal EF both before and after RP. Thus, using validated psychometric instruments with recognized cut-offs for normalcy and severity during the pre- and post-operative evaluation should be routinely considered. Therefore, a comprehensive discussion with the patient about the true prevalence of postoperative ED, the concept of spontaneous or pharmacologically-assisted erections, and the difference between “back to baseline” EF and “erections adequate enough to have successful intercourse” clearly emerge as key issues in the eventual understanding of post-RP ED prevention and promotion of satisfactory EF recovery. Patient factors (including age, baseline EF, comorbid conditions status), cancer selection (non- vs. uni- vs. bilateral nerve-sparing), type of surgery (i.e., intra vs. inter vs. extrafascial surgeries), surgical techniques (i.e., open, laparoscopic and robotically-assisted RP), and surgeon factors (i.e., surgical volume and surgical skill) represent the key significant contributors to EF recovery. A number of preclinical and clinical data show that rehabilitation and treatment in due time are undoubtedly better than leaving the erectile tissue to its unassisted postoperative fate. The role of postoperative ED treatment for those patients who received a non-nerve-sparing RP was also extensively discussed. Optimal outcomes are achieved mainly by the careful choice of the correct patient for the correct type of surgery. Despite a plethora of potential rehabilitative approaches, they should be only considered as “strategies”, since incontrovertible evidence of their effectiveness for improving natural EF recovery is limited. Conversely, numerous effective therapeutic options are available for treating post-RP ED.

Penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: does it work?

CONTEXT

Erectile dysfunction (ED) represents one of the most common long-term side effects in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP).

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the role of penile rehabilitation in the recovery of erectile function (EF) after nerve-sparing RP.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Penile rehabilitation is defined as the use of any intervention or combination with the goal not only to achieve erections sufficient for satisfactory sexual intercourses, but also to return EF to preoperative levels. The concept of rehabilitation is based on the implementation of protocols aimed at improving oxygenation, preserving endothelial structure, and preventing smooth muscle structural alterations. Nowadays, the most commonly adopted approaches for penile rehabilitation after nerve-sparing RP are represented by the administration of phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is), intracorporeal injection therapy, vacuum erection devices (VED), and the combination of these therapies. Several basic science studies support the rational for the adoption of penile rehabilitation protocols. Particularly, rehabilitation, set as early as possible, seems to be better than leaving the erectile tissues unassisted. On the other hand, results from solid prospective randomized trials finally assessing the long-term beneficial effects of PDE5-Is, intracavernosal injections, or VED on EF recovery after surgery are still lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Although preclinical evidences support the rationale for penile rehabilitation after nerve-sparing RP, clinical studies reported conflicting results regarding its efficacy on long-term EF recovery. Nowadays, which is the optimal rehabilitation program still represents a matter of debate.

Management of erectile dysfunction post-radical prostatectomy

Radical prostatectomy is a commonly performed procedure for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. One of the long-term complications is erectile dysfunction. There is little consensus on the optimal management; however, it is agreed that treatment must be prompt to prevent fibrosis and increase oxygenation of penile tissue. It is vital that patient expectations are discussed, a realistic time frame of treatment provided, and treatment started as close to the prostatectomy as possible. Current treatment regimens rely on phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors as a first-line therapy, with vacuum erection devices and intraurethral suppositories of alprostadil as possible treatment combination options. With nonresponders to these therapies, intracavernosal injections are resorted to. As a final measure, patients undergo the highly invasive penile prosthesis implantation. There is no uniform, objective treatment program for erectile dysfunction post-radical prostatectomy. Management plans are based on poorly conducted and often underpowered studies in combination with physician and patient preferences. They involve the aforementioned drugs and treatment methods in different sequences and doses. Prospective treatments include dietary supplements and gene therapy, which have shown promise with there proposed mechanisms of improving erectile function but are yet to be applied successfully in human patients.

[Should we recommend an erectile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy? Systematic review of the literature by the Sexual Medicine Committee of the French Urology Association]

INTRODUCTION

Radical prostatectomy has evolved considerably during the last 20 years, with one hand, a thorough knowledge of the anatomy of the prostate, and secondly, the introduction of new conservation techniques of neurovascular bundles. Despite this progress, the rate of post-prostatectomy erectile dysfunction varies between 30 and 90% depending on the series and this element impacts the quality of life after radical prostatectomy. The objective of this work was to conduct a review of the literature in order to evaluate the various protocols of post-radical prostatectomy erectile rehabilitation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature from the basic PubMed search was performed using the following keywords. Therapy erectile dysfunction, radical prostatectomy, penile rehabilitation, phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, intracavernous injection.

RESULTS

The critical analysis of selected studies highlights the lack of standard protocol that established erectile rehabilitation early after radical prostatectomy. These studies have shown that early treatment, injections or intracavernous PDE5 inhibitors improved recovery of erections as recommended by the French Association of Urology.

CONCLUSION

Management of disorders of post-radical prostatectomy sexuality is essential, it must be organized in a well-established protocol combining pharmacological and therapeutic education assistances delivered by practitioners or nurses. It would need to develop in a clinical trial a standard protocol.