A risk-benefit assessment of sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction

Pathophysiological role of the renin-angiotensin system on erectile dysfunction

BACKGROUND

The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has been shown to play an active role within the erectile tissues. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the literature addressing the pathophysiological role of RAS on erectile function. Additionally, we update evidence on recent findings on the role of the Ang-(1-7) and Mas receptor on the erectile function and its therapeutic potential for treating erectile dysfunction (ED).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This narrative review is based on the material searched and obtained via MEDLINE and PubMed up to November 2012. The search terms we used are 'angiotensin, erectile dysfunction, renin, Mas receptor' in combination with 'pathophysiology, fibrosis, pathways'.

RESULTS

The levels of angiotensin (Ang) II, the main component of this system, are increased in the corpus cavernosum as compared to those found in the systemic circulation. Moreover, emerging evidence indicates that an increased activity of Ang II via AT1 receptor might contribute to the development of ED, whereas the pharmacological blockage of Ang II/AT1 actions has beneficial effects on the erection. On the other hand, the heptapeptide Ang-(1-7), known as a major endogenous counter-regulator of Ang II actions, favours penile erection via the activation of Mas receptor.

CONCLUSIONS

Ang-(1-7) and Mas receptor pathway might be considered as a promising therapeutic target for the treatment of ED.

Comparison of a needle-free high-pressure injection system with needle-tipped injection of intracavernosal alprostadil for erectile dysfunction

Patients identified from hospital records as using alprostadil injections for erectile dysfunction were invited to take part in this open crossover study. On alternate weeks eight patients were given intracavernosal needle injections and transdermal needle-free injection of alprostadil in a randomized order. Efficacy of injection and associated pain were assessed and compared for the two methods. Pain produced during injection was significantly greater with the needle-free system than with the needle-tipped injection whilst efficacy was significantly less. Bruising was reported in all except one patient following needle-free injection only. Patient ratings of the needle-free injector were significantly lower than ratings for needle-tipped alprostadil delivery and when asked to express a preference, every patient chose the needle-tipped injection over the needle-free device.