Optimal strategy for penile rehabilitation after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy based on preoperative erectile function.

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: Removing of prostate for the treatment of localized prostate cancer is associated with a variable loss of erectile function due to injury of the nerves of erection during operation. Some researchers have reported that after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP), the natural recovery time of erectile function is at least 2 years. Factors such as thermal damage, ischaemic injury, mechanically induced nerve stretching and the local inflammatory effects of surgical trauma may also impair the cavernous nerves during RP. The concept of penile rehabilitation was first studied by Montorsi et al. in 1997. They showed that the use of any drug or device at or after RP could maximize the recovery of erectile function. Penile rehabilitation programmes (PRPs) with vasoactive agents, such as oral phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5Is), intraurethral and intracavernosal vasoactive agents, and vacuum erection devices (VEDs) can protect erectile tissue integrity and prevent corporal smooth muscle atrophy and diminish collagen formation. The present findings are consistent with previous reports that PRPs have a significant beneficial effect on early erectile function recovery and that preoperative erectile function is one of the important predictors of erectile function after RP. Patients can be referred for penile rehabilitation if they have any degree of erectile function (mild, moderate or normal) before operation. We also showed that the combination of PDE5Is and VEDs for PRPs offers the shortest erectile function recovery period. To define the optimal penile rehabilitation programme (PRP) based on preoperative Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) scores after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). The medical records of 203 patients who underwent bilateral nerve-sparing RARP between 2007 and 2011 were reviewed for the present retrospective study. According to patients' preoperative erection status, group 1 (SHIM = 8-16), group 2 (SHIM = 17-21) and group 3 (SHIM = 22-25) were defined. After bilateral nerve-sparing RARP, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5Is), a vacuum erection device (VED), the combination of PDE5Is and a VED, or none of them were utilized by all patients for penile rehabilitation. Treatment success was defined as a rigid erection suitable for successful sexual intercourse. The numbers of patients in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively, were 9, 22 and 73, and the mean erectile function recovery periods (EFRPs) were 15.44 ± 7.73, 12.31 ± 8.12 and 8.73 ± 5.67 months (P < 0.05). Group 3 offered the best results for EFRP. Only PDE5Is or the combination of PDE5Is and VED use had a beneficial effect on EFRP (P < 0.05). Using PDE5Is and VED together provided the best result, but there was no difference between PDE5Is and a VED (P ≥ 0.05). After bilateral nerve-sparing RARP, PRP with PDE5Is, including the combination of PDE5Is and VED, has a beneficial effect on erectile function recovery across all levels of baseline erectile function. Further large randomized control studies are needed to validate these findings.

Basal S ，Wambi C ，Acikel C ，Gupta M ，Badani K ... -  《-》

Predicting participation in and successful outcome of a penile rehabilitation programme using a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor with a vacuum erection device after radical prostatectomy.

Study Type--Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The role of the vacuum erection device (VED) has increased with its use in combined therapy with a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) for penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy. The advantages of the VED are non-invasive, cost-effective, and a possibility of preventing shrinkage of penis length. Albeit current widespread use of penile rehabilitation programmes for post-RP erectile dysfunction, independent predictors for the rehabilitation participants, as well as for its treatment success have not been fully investigated. In the present study, we have added several new predictors for rehabilitation participation, e.g. African-Americans and higher preoperative sexual function. Conversely, higher preoperative PSA concentrations and the presence of positive surgical margins were predictors for avoidance of rehabilitation. Notably, there was a primary surgeon difference, which had a trend for predicting outcome of the rehabilitation among the participants, implying their surgical technique and follow-up might influence success of the rehabilitation. • To investigate baseline demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of men who participate in our penile rehabilitation programme after radical prostatectomy (RP). • To determine predictors for participation in rehabilitation, as well as successful rehabilitation outcome using multivariable logistic regression analyses. • We analysed data on 2345 consecutive patients who underwent RP between 2001 and 2009 in our institution. • The decision to participate in penile rehabilitation using phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) with a vacuum erection device (VED) was based on the patient's choice after post-RP discussions. • Rehabilitation success was defined using the following criteria: (i) patients who continued the penile rehabilitation programme and did not switch treatment from PDE5i to other erectile aids, (ii) success was noted in men who had an Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) sexual function (SF) score of >75% of the patient's baseline EPIC score, and (iii) patients who answered that they achieved adequate erections with a PDE5i. • Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment participation and its success. • Of 676 patients, 354 (53.2%) men participated in a penile rehabilitation programme. Among 329 rehabilitation participants with available data, 96 (29.2%) had treatment success. • In multivariable regression analysis, African-Americans (odds ratio [OR] 3.47, P < 0.001), and higher preoperative SF (OR 1.02, P < 0.001) were associated with participation in rehabilitation. • Higher preoperative PSA concentration (OR 0.50, P = 0.004) and presence of positive surgical margins (OR 0.68, P = 0.042) were found to be independent predictors for non-participation in the rehabilitation. • For rehabilitation outcomes, being older at surgery (OR 0.93, P = 0.001) and adjuvant therapy (OR 0.34, P = 0.047) had a negative association with successful outcome. • There was a trend in the relationship between primary surgeon and rehabilitation success (OR 1.05, P = 0.053) • Those patients who have risk factors, e.g. adverse prostate cancer features, need to be carefully counselled and encouraged to participate in the penile rehabilitation programme. • Clinicians could lead patients toward successful outcomes if appropriate surgical techniques and rehabilitation are provided.

Kimura M ，Caso JR ，Bañez LL ，Koontz BF ，Gerber L ，Senocak C ，Donatucci CF ，Vujaskovic Z ，Moul JW ，Polascik TJ ... -  《-》

Comparison of efficacy and satisfaction profile, between penile prosthesis implantation and oral PDE5 inhibitor tadalafil therapy, in men with nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction.

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: Erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy constitutes a challenge to the urologist. The mainstay of medical treatment after radical prostatectomy to restore spontaneous erectile function remains phosphodiesterase (PDE5) inhibitors, despite the fact that data from animal studies suggesting that PDE5 inhibitors can prevent smooth muscle apoptosis and fibrosis have not yet been extrapolated to humans because of a lack of standardized protocols. If the above treatment fails, second-line therapies such as intraurethral prostaglandins, penile injection therapy and vacuum devices are offered. When less invasive therapies are ineffective, interventions that preserve sexual function such as penile prosthesis implantation become the treatment of choice. Our study reveals the alternative of penile prosthesis implantation as first-line treatment in erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. It also highlights its superiority to the oral PDE5 inhibitor treatment, regarding the erection, frequency, firmness, maintenance and penetration ability. This suggests that a concept of an early penile intervention in the future would be promising for those patients who wish to remain sexually active without depending on oral formulations with doubtful and delayed results. To evaluate the outcome of penile prosthesis surgery in comparison to oral phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor administration, in men with erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy, as early penile intervention therapy. A total of 174 patients treated by nerve-sparing retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) for clinically localized prostate cancer, between January 2006 and September 2009 enrolled in the study, 153 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 69 (45%) patients presented with post-RRP erectile dysfunction 6 months after primary surgery. Fifty-four patients were disease-free and subdivided into two arms according to treatment modality, either tadalafil three times/week or penile prosthesis implantation. All patients were evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire preoperatively and at 6, 12 and 24 month postoperatively. Repeated measurements analysis of variance was conducted to evaluate the effect of time and group on IIEF total score. There was a significant reduction in IIEF score from preoperative values to the first measurement after surgery in both treatment groups. The overall degree of change from the first time point immediately after surgery to 2 years was greater in the penile prosthesis group than the tadalafil group (20.4 ± 1.3 vs 8.1 ± 2.4, P < 0.001). The efficacy and satisfaction results of both treatment types are considered acceptable. However, regarding the erection frequency, firmness, penetration ability, maintenance and erection confidence it seems that penile prosthesis implantation is superior to oral treatment. The concept of early penile intervention should be considered and is promising for all patients with post-RRP erectile dysfunction.

Megas G ，Papadopoulos G ，Stathouros G ，Moschonas D ，Gkialas I ，Ntoumas K ... -  《-》

Erectile rehabilitation with intracavernous alprostadil after radical prostatectomy: refusal and dropout rates.

Study Type--Therapy (outcomes) Level of Evidence 2a. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a well known implication of radical prostatectomy (RP). Despite the search for technical improvement in the surgical procedure (e.g. nerve-sparing surgery, robot-assisted RP), many patients still suffer from an inability to achieve a satisfactory erection after surgery. In the last 20 years a great effort has been made to re-establish good sexual function in these patients. Many different approaches have been used, such as intracavernous prostaglandin E1 (PGE1), phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, vacuum devices and penile prostheses. Although many studies have addressed the main questions about efficacy of different approaches to ED, there is a lack of data about adherence to therapy and the main reasons why patients drop out of these treatment programmes. In the present study, a cohort of men treated with RP underwent a postoperative rehabilitation protocol with PGE1 intracavernous injections. During the follow-up period, we were able to assess a real-life practice pattern of adherence and dropout, evaluating the main causes of therapy discontinuation. This could be of help in the counselling of these patients during the path towards erection recovery. • To assess the rate of compliance in the first 6 months of a rehabilitation protocol that includes intracavernous alprostadil administration in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. • To determine the reasons for and timings of dropout from the protocol by the patients and their subsequent outcomes. • All patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) at our institution between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2009 were considered for a protocol of postoperative intracavernous sexual rehabilitation and were administered entry questionnaires to evaluate their preoperative sexual activity. • Four weeks after surgery, the patients were invited to return for a first visit, where the aim of the protocol and possible risks and benefits were explained. For those who agreed to attend, subsequent visits to include assisted self-administration of increasing doses of intracavernous alprostadil and a period of autonomous homely self-administration were planned. • Patients were followed up at 3-month intervals, where data on functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and the number of patients who dropped out and their reasons, were recorded by means of appropriate questionnaires. • Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test or a chi-squared test, where appropriate. • Of 430 patients, 157 (36.5%) refused to undergo the protocol of rehabilitation and 18.6% of the patients who began the protocol dropped out over the first 6 months. • Reasons for refusal were: patient's lack of sexual interest (51.6%); lack of interest by the partner (30.2%); and presence of transitory incontinence (26.7%). • Reasons for dropout were: disappointment with treatment efficacy (64.7%); injection pain (45%); and difficulties with or fear of performing the injection by themselves or by the partner (35.2%). No patient claimed the cost of the drug to be a cause for dropout. • The protocol we used, involving intracavernous alprostadil injection, proved to be a safe and efficient way of achieving sexual rehabilitation in patients who have undergone RP. Nevertheless, high patient motivation and adherence to the protocol were required. • Factors influencing patients refusal and early-to-medium time dropout were both patient- and partner-related. Appropriate information, counselling and support of the couple before the beginning and at all stages of the rehabilitation play a fundamental role in reducing the dropout rate. • The situation regarding those patients who still need adjuvant therapy after surgery is less clear and further research on this is required.

Polito M ，d'Anzeo G ，Conti A ，Muzzonigro G ... -  《-》

A pilot study on the early use of the vacuum erection device after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Köhler TS ，Pedro R ，Hendlin K ，Utz W ，Ugarte R ，Reddy P ，Makhlouf A ，Ryndin I ，Canales BK ，Weiland D ，Nakib N ，Ramani A ，Anderson JK ，Monga M ... -  《BJU INTERNATIONAL》