Alprostadil cream in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: clinical evidence and experience

Scoping review exploring advancements in topical agent therapies for erectile dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common issue that affects older men and is often associated with various health conditions. Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors are commonly used to treat ED; however, their effectiveness may be limited, or the medication may be contraindicated. Therefore, topical gels are being developed as an alternative option for the pharmacologic treatment of ED.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of topical agents for the treatment of ED.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched. Articles were included that investigated ED and topical agents operating through the skin of the penis, evaluated the effectiveness of the treatment, and involved patients randomized into groups.

RESULTS

Topical alprostadil, glyceryl trinitrate (MED2005), and an over-the-counter formulation (MED3000) were used as alternative treatments for ED in 7 articles, which included 3475 patients. Topical alprostadil induced an erection in 67% to 75% of patients. Adequate erections for vaginal penetration were reported in 38.7% of the alprostadil-treated patients vs 6.9% of the placebo-treated patients. Topical alprostadil significantly and dose dependently improved the total score change on the International Index of Erectile Function as compared with the placebo. MED2005 exhibited a rapid onset of action, with nearly 70% effectiveness within 10 minutes. MED3000 met the minimal clinically important difference threshold of a 4-point increase on the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function, with an improvement of 5.73 points in 24 weeks. Topical therapy for ED also had acceptable safety profiles.

CONCLUSION

Topical agents via various mechanisms are effective and well-tolerated treatments for ED. A fast-acting drug that significantly reduces side effects as compared with other options has been discovered. However, its efficacy relative to current first-line therapies remains unclear. Topical agents present a viable therapeutic alternative for individuals who are unable or unwilling to take oral phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors.

The erectile and ejaculatory implications of the surgical management of rectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is a significant cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Although advances in surgical technology and technique have decreased mortality rates, surviving patients often experience sexual dysfunction as a common complication. The development of the lower anterior resection has greatly decreased the use of the radical abdominoperineal resection surgery, but even the less radical surgery can result in sexual dysfunction, including erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction. Improving the knowledge of the underlying causes of sexual dysfunction in this context and developing effective strategies for preventing and treating these adverse effects are essential to improving the quality of life for postoperative rectal cancer patients. This article aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation of erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction in postoperative rectal cancer patients, including their pathophysiology and time course and strategies for prevention and treatment.

Prostaglandins as a Topical Therapy for Erectile Dysfunction: A Comprehensive Review

INTRODUCTION

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a substantial cause of dissatisfaction among many men. This discontentment has led to the emergence of various drug treatment options for this problem.

OBJECTIVES

Unfortunately, due to various interactions, contraindications, and side effects, systemic therapies such as phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (including sildenafil, tadalafil, vardenafil, avanafil, etc.) are not welcomed in many patients. These problems have led researchers to look for other ways to reduce these complications.

METHODS

This article holistically reviews the efficacy of topical prostaglandins and their role in treating ED. We sought to provide a comprehensive overview of recent findings on the current topic by using the extensive literature search to identify the latest scientific reports on the topic.

RESULTS

In this regard, topical and transdermal treatments can be suitable alternatives. In diverse studies, prostaglandins, remarkably PGE1 (also known as alprostadil), have been suggested to be an acceptable candidate for topical treatment.

CONCLUSION

Numerous formulations of PGE1 have been used to treat patients so far. Still, in general, with the evolution of classical formulation methods toward modern techniques (such as using nanocarriers and skin permeability enhancers), the probability of treatment success also increases.

Combination therapy with topical alprostadil and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors after failure of oral therapy in patients with erectile dysfunction: a prospective, two-arm, open-label, non-randomized study

Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5Is) are the first-line therapeutic option for erectile dysfunction (ED), while second-line therapy includes the alprostadil. Due to the different pharmacodynamic mechanism of PDE5Is and alprostadil, a synergistic action is conceivable when they are administered in combination. The aim of present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with PDE5I and topical alprostadil in patients with ED non-responders to PDE5I alone. We designed a prospective, two-arm, open-label, non-randomized study. Patients over 18 years old, with a stable sexual relationship for at least 6 months, and ED non-responders to PDE5I monotherapy were included in the study. At baseline the variables assessed were 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), and Sexual Encounter Profile Questions 2 and 3 (SEP-2 and SEP-3). In addition, all subjects underwent penile dynamic duplex ultrasonography. All patients were assigned to the monotherapy group (Group A) or combination therapy group (Group B) based on their preference. Topical alprostadil 300 μg/100 mg (Virirec®) was the treatment assigned to Group A, while the combination therapy with the last PDE5I taken (at the maximum recommended dose) plus topical alprostadil 300 μg/100 mg (Virirec®) was assigned to Group B. After 3 months from assignment to groups were evaluated IIEF-5, SEP-2 and SEP-3 regarding the last sexual intercourse, and Global Assessment Questionnaire-Questions 1 and 2 (GAQ-1 and GAQ-2). All adverse events (AEs) that occurred during the study period were recorded. A total of 170 patients were included in the study (72 in Group A and 98 in Group B). Fifty-two patients were previously treated with sildenafil 100 mg (30.6%), 6 with vardenafil 20 mg (3.5%), 56 with tadalafil 20 mg (32.9%), and 56 with avanafil 200 mg (32.9%). No significant differences among the study groups were found at baseline (p > 0.05). The mean IIEF-5 score increased significantly in Group B after treatment compared to baseline (12.4 ± 3.4 vs. 17.1 ± 4.5; p < 0.001), conversely patients in Group A showed no significant increase (12.2 ± 2.5 vs. 12.7 ± 3.1; p = 0.148). The number of affirmative responses to SEP-2 was significantly higher after treatment compared to baseline only in Group B (57 vs. 78; p < 0.001). The number of affirmative responses to SEP-3 was significantly higher after treatment compared to baseline in both groups (p < 0.001). The number of affirmative responses to GAQ-Q1 and GAQ-Q2 was significantly higher in Group B compared to Group A (p < 0.001). A total of 59 (34.7%) patients experienced AEs. They were mild, self-limited, and did not cause discontinuation of treatment. No episode of priapism was recorded. No statistically significant difference was recorded between the AEs of the two groups, except for facial flushing that was reported only in Group B (p = 0.021). The combination therapy with topical alprostadil and PDE5I seems to be more effective than topical alprostadil alone without worsening the safety of the treatment.

Lipid-based nanoparticles in the treatment of erectile dysfunction

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common disorder among men, with significant public health implications. Current therapies have certain limitations including efficacy and safety issues, necessitating the development of novel therapeutic strategies for ED. Nanotechnology-based drug delivery systems are being explored to overcome these limitations with promising in vitro and in vivo efficacies. In particular, lipid-based nanoparticles have generated considerable interest owing to their potential to enhance drug bioavailability, and decrease side effects and drug susceptibility to metabolism. This review summarizes the recent findings using lipid-based nanoparticles in ED therapy.

Is topical alprostadil an usable and reliable alternative to intracavernous injection for penile dynamic duplex ultrasonography?

No study has yet been done to evaluate topical alprostadil as a less invasive alternative vasoactive agent for Penile Dynamic Duplex Ultrasonography (PDDU) in the diagnosis of erectile dysfunction. The main aim of our study was to evaluate the usability and reliability of topical alprostadil for PDDU compared with standard intracavernous injection. A further objective was to determine the patients' preference between these two different approaches. During session A, patients received injection while during session B, they received topical alprostadil. Each patient underwent both sessions, 1 week apart from the other. A total of 80 patients were enrolled. After 20 min from drug administration, no significant difference was found between the two procedures in terms of peak systolic velocity and end-diastolic velocity, while Erection Hardness Score was significantly higher with injection. Patients reported less pain/discomfort during the procedure in case of topical alprostadil use and an overall preference towards this examination modality. Topical alprostadil could represent a usable and reliable alternative to intracavernous injection for PDDU, with less discomfort and greater preference by patients.

Hard flaccid syndrome: initial report of four cases

Hard flaccid (HF) is a group of symptoms that significantly affects a man's sexual and social life. As this syndrome has only been reported in several patient forums, exact prevalence of this rare condition is unknown. Currently, no scientific literature exists of the syndrome. We, hereby, aimed to present four cases suffering from HF and compare the common signs and symptoms with those reported in patient forums. We searched internet forums, chat groups, and private support groups to collect information about symptoms of HF patients. We have identified several complaints regarding penis, erections, libido, urination, and ejaculation. Moreover, we have also collected common findings of laboratory and imaging tests that are used in the workup of HF. The majority of the HF patients is in their 20s-30s. Patients usually seek medical advice due to the following complaints: penile sensory changes (numb or cold), semi-rigid penis at the flaccid state, decreased frequency of morning and/or nocturnal erections, loss in erectile rigidity, difficulty in achieving and maintaining their erections, need for excessive physical or visual stimulation to become erect, and pain on ejaculation and/or urination. Psychological symptoms are usually present ranging from mild anxiety to severe depression. Moreover, laboratory and imaging tests are often unremarkable. Our cases included men between the ages of 22 and 34 years of age and they all reported the onset of their symptoms after a trauma during sexual intercourse or tough masturbation. Compared with reports in patient forums, many of these symptoms (except the urination problems) were observed in our patients and the imaging/laboratory tests were inconclusive. The patients were provided daily/on-demand phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, which were not effective. Currently, HF syndrome has not been universally recognized by urologists and a number of patients seem to suffer from this disorder. In order to raise awareness of this clinical phenomenon, HF must be recognized by professional organizations and a better understanding of the disorder must be established.

Experience of a Tertiary-Level Urology Center in the Clinical Urological Events of Rare and Very Rare Incidence. II. Urological Self-Inflicted Harms: 1. Unintentional Patient's Side-Inflictor Urological Injuries

INTRODUCTION

Unintentional self-inflicted injuries mainly refer to those injuries which are inflicted by the patient himself with benign intentions. In urology, they may vary and result in significant morbidities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective search of our patients' data records for the reported cases of patient's side-inflictor urological injuries during the period July 2006 - June 2016 was made. Each case was studied for age, gender, primary diagnosis, injury inflictor, involved organ, motivating factor, mechanism, diagnosis, management, and final outcome.

RESULTS

Of more than 55,000 urological procedures, 26 patients (0.047%) were involved in unintentional patient's side-inflictor urological injuries. The age range was 8-76 years and included 23 males and 3 females. Fifteen patients (57.7%) had urological disorders before the injury. They could be differentiated into direct organ involvement injuries (53.8%) and catheter involvement injuries (46.2%). External male urogenital organs were involved in 69.3% of cases which were diagnosed on physical examination. The inflictor of the injury was the patient himself, a relative, and another patient in 73.1, 19.2, and 7.7% of cases, respectively. Motivating factors were relief of painful conditions (34.6%), psychiatric disorders (38.5%), and sexual purposes (27%). Final outcomes were short-term harm, long-term harm, and permanent disability in 50, 11.5, and 38.5% of cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Unintentional patient's side-inflictor urological injuries are very rare events and mainly involve the external male urogenital organs under different motivating stressors. They could be differen-tiated into direct organ and catheter manipulation injuries with variable final outcomes from mild short-term harms to permanent disabilities.