Nocturnal erections, differential diagnosis of impotence, and diabetes. I Karacan, FB Scott, PJ Salis, SL Attia, JC Ware, A Altinel, and RL Williams

Consecutive nightly measurements are needed for accurate evaluation of nocturnal erectile capacity when the first-night laboratory recording is abnormal

Multiple measurements of nocturnal penile tumescence and rigidity (NPTR) are widely accepted as a method to differentiate psychogenic erectile dysfunction (ED) from organic ED. However, direct evidence remains limited regarding the first-night effect on NPTR measurement using the RigiScan. Here, we evaluated the first-night effect on the results of NPTR measurement to validate the necessity of NPTR measurement for two consecutive nights, particularly when abnormal first-night measurements are recorded in a laboratory setting. We retrospectively reviewed 105 patients with a complaint of ED, who underwent NPTR measurement using the RigiScan in the Department of Infertility and Sexual Medicine, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China), for two consecutive nights, during the period from November 2015 to May 2016. NPTR parameters were collected and analyzed. We found that more effective nocturnal erections were detected during the second night than during the first night (P <0.001). Twenty percent of all patients had no effective erection during the first night, but exhibited at least one effective erection during the second night. The negative predictive value of NPTR measurement during the first night was 43.2%; this was significantly lower than that on the second night (84.2%; P = 0.003). Most NPTR parameters were better on the second night than on the first night. The first-night effect might be greater among patients younger than 40 years of age. In conclusion, two consecutive nightly measurements of NPTR can avoid a false-abnormal result caused by the first-night effect; moreover, these measurements more accurately reflect erectile capacity, especially when the first-night record is abnormal in a laboratory setting.

Sleep-related erections throughout the ages

INTRODUCTION

The occurrence of sleep-related erections (SREs) has been known since antiquity.

AIM

To highlight historical, theological, and sexual medicine-related aspects of SREs throughout the ages.

METHODS

Review of old medical books on male sexual functioning and review of scientific medical and theological articles on SREs from about 1900 on.

RESULTS

The cyclic character of SREs was first noted by German researchers in the forties of the 20th century. However, already before the beginning of the Christian era, one knew that men had erections and ejaculations during sleep. In the Middle Ages, SREs were generally considered to be rebellious manifestations of the male body, while it seemed to disobey its owner and showed up its perverted and sinful side. From the fifteenth to the end of the 17th century, severe erectile dysfunction (ED) was ground for divorce. The ecclesiastical court records show that if necessary, the members of the jury sat at the defendant's bedside at night to be able to judge any SREs occurring. Since the 17th century, SREs were considered to be part of masturbation, which could cause many ailments and diseases. Psychoanalyst Stekel acknowledged in 1920 that a morning erection, the last SRE, is a naturally occurring phenomenon in healthy men from infancy to old age. Today, some scientists assume that SREs protect the integrity of the penile cavernous bodies.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughout the ages, philosophers, theologians, physicians, members of ecclesial law courts, psychoanalysts, psychiatrists, sexologists, physiologists, and urologists have shown interest in SREs. Obviously, the observations and testing of SREs have a long history, from antiquity to modern sleep labs, in men and in women, in newborns and old adults, by penis rings with sharp spikes to fancy strain gauge devices. Despite all these efforts, the mechanisms leading to SREs and its function are however not yet completely understood.

Use and abuse of Rigiscan in the diagnosis of erectile dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

Nocturnal penile tumescence and rigidity (NPTR, or, more simply, NPT) studies, with or without the help of a recording computer (Rigiscan), have been traditionally positioned at the head of several erectile dysfunction (ED) diagnostic flowcharts with the aim to distinguish between psychogenic and organic etiology. Shall we continue to consider these tools as a diagnostic gold standard in ED diagnosis?

METHODS

Four scientists with expertise and/or interest in the area of ED pathophysiology and diagnosis were asked to contribute their opinions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

To give to The Journal of Sexual Medicine's reader new stimuli to reexamine a still largely utilized tool utilized in sexual medicine's clinical practice.

RESULTS

Of the four experts discussing the topic, the first who is the section editor of the Controversy section, believes that NPT/Rigiscan cannot be considered a useful diagnostic tool for differential diagnosis in ED. He is supported by the physiological considerations of the second expert and by the experimental evidence produced and discussed by the expert number four who questions the accuracy, reliability, and usefulness of these tools to measure a critical aspect of the erection physiology which is the adequate rigidity. In contrast, with several good arguments, the third expert still suggests the use of these tools, perhaps not for every man presenting with ED, but at least for the patient with no neurovascular risk factors who presents with a history suggestive of a psychogenic cause.

CONCLUSION

The reader will judge if the expensive, complicated, and time-consuming effort to record nocturnal erectile activity is or is not useful anymore for the patient and for orienting the treatment choices.