No effect of abstinence time on nerve electrophysiological test in premature ejaculation patients

Potential biomarkers for distinguishing primary from acquired premature ejaculation: A diffusion tensor imaging based network study

Introduction

Premature ejaculation (PE) is classified as primary and acquired and may be facilitated by different pathophysiology. Brain plays an important role in PE, however, differences in the central neuropathological mechanisms among subtypes of PE are unknown.

Materials and methods

We acquired diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data from 44 healthy controls (HC) and 47 PE patients (24 primary PE and 23 acquired PE). Then, the whole-brain white matter (WM) structural networks were constructed and between-group differences of nodal segregative parameters were identified by the method of graph theoretical analysis. Moreover, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were performed to determine the suitability of the altered parameters as potential neuroimaging biomarkers for distinguishing primary PE from acquired PE.

Results

PE patients showed significantly increased clustering coefficient C(i) in the left inferior frontal gyrus (triangular part) (IFGtriang.L) and increased local efficiency E_loc(i) in the left precental gyrus (PreCG.L) and IFGtriang.L when compared with HC. Compared to HC, primary PE patients had increased C(i) and E_loc(i) in IFGtriang.L and the left amygdala (AMYG.L) while acquired PE patients had increased C(i) and E_loc(i) in IFGtriang.L, and decreased C(i) and E_loc(i) in AMYG.L. Compared to acquired PE, primary PE patients had increased C(i) and E_loc(i) in AMYG.L. Moreover, ROC analysis revealed that PreCG.L, IFGtriang.L and AMYG.L might be helpful for distinguishing different subtypes of PE from HC (PE from HC: sensitivity, 61.70–78.72%; specificity, 56.82–77.27%; primary PE from HC: sensitivity, 66.67–87.50%; specificity, 52.27–77.27%; acquired PE from HC: sensitivity, 34.78–86.96%; specificity, 54.55–100%) while AMYG.L might be helpful for distinguishing primary PE from acquired PE (sensitivity, 83.33–91.70%; specificity, 69.57–73.90%).

Conclusion

These findings improved our understanding of the pathophysiological processes that occurred in patients with ejaculatory dysfunction and suggested that the abnormal segregation of left amygdala might serve as a useful marker to help clinicians distinguish patients with primary PE from those with acquired PE.

A Study of Differences in Penile Dorsal Nerve Somatosensory Evoked Potential Testing Among Healthy Controls and Patients With Primary and Secondary Premature Ejaculation

BACKGROUND

Penile dorsal nerve somatosensory evoked potential (DNSEP) is a scientific and objective technique that provides effective and objective data to establish the diagnosis of premature ejaculation (PE).

AIM

To explore differences in DNSEP between patients with primary premature ejaculation (PPE) and those with secondary premature ejaculation (SPE), in order to investigate the clinical value of DNSEP in the diagnosis of PE.

METHODS

The participants were divided into a PPE group (34 cases), an SPE group (25 cases) and a healthy control group (18 cases). All participants underwent DNSEP testing, and the latencies and amplitudes of DNSEP were recorded.

OUTCOMES

Differences in the latencies and amplitudes of DNSEP were compared among the PPE, SPE, and healthy control groups.

RESULTS

The latencies of DNSEP in the PPE and SPE groups were shorter than those in the healthy control group, and these differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the PPE and SPE groups (P > 0.05). The amplitudes of DNSEP in the PPE group were significantly higher than those in the healthy control group (P < 0.01). However, the amplitudes of DNSEP in the SPE group were significantly lower than those in the healthy control group (P < 0.05).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

PPE and SPE can be differentiated based on differences in the amplitudes of DNSEP, providing an objective basis for treatments and follow-up examinations.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

We evaluated differences in the amplitudes of DNSEP between PPE and SPE patients, which were rare in the published literature. However, specific causes of these differences are still unclear. SEP only reflects afferent pathways in the ejaculatory reflex arc, and role of the brain as a higher center should not be ignored.

CONCLUSION

Both PPE and SPE patients are characterized by an increased excitability of the penile sensory nerves. Sun Z, Liao Z, Zheng Q, et al. A Study of Differences in Penile Dorsal Nerve Somatosensory Evoked Potential Testing Among Healthy Controls and Patients With Primary and Secondary Premature Ejaculation. J Sex Med Rev 2021;18:732-736.

Advantages and limitations of current premature ejaculation assessment and diagnostic methods: a review

Premature ejaculation (PE) is the most common male sexual dysfunction worldwide. Characteristic symptoms of PE are unexpected, rapid, complete ejaculation, which negatively impacts the sexual act for both sexual partners. Despite the existence of a definitive PE classification system and various diagnostic tools, diagnosing PE is still challenging due to the limitations associated with the assessment of this condition. Hence, it is necessary to review the diagnostic methods and processes of the physical examination that are currently performed in the medical setting. It is also important to analyze any controversial results of each main PE assessment method and propose novel diagnostic and assessment methods. To date, it is important to verify the accuracy of the PE evaluation method due to the ambiguity of previous definitions and proven invalidity of current examining techniques. Clinical diagnosis is based mainly on the patient history, patient-reported outcome scores, and diagnostic tools. Introduction of intravaginal ejaculatory latency time, penile biothesiometry, and the electrophysiological test provided objective means of evaluating PE. Due to the controversial and inconclusive findings in PE psychogenic and neurogenic etiology, utilizing a single parameter to describe and qualify PE using the aforementioned diagnostic methods provides valuable, but insufficient information for PE diagnosis. There is still a lack of a feasible and plausible means of objective measurement to evaluate the ejaculatory latency and control over ejaculation. Consequently, a comprehensive penile stimulation that simulates sexual intercourse could be useful to record intensity and duration parameters before the ejaculatory threshold, providing a more accurate method of describing and diagnosing PE versus a single chronological observation.