ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of chronic use of sildenafil and intracavernous injection (ICI) with trimix in men not responding to on-demand monotherapy with sildenafil or ICI with prostaglandin-E1 (PGE1). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 40 patients with erectile dysfunction (ED), with a mean (SD) age of 50.7 (11.3) years and unresponsive to on-demand sildenafil or ICI with PGE1 as monotherapy. They were assessed using the Sexual Health in Men (SHIM)-5 score for ED severity, penile colour Doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) for peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV) and resistance index (RI) with an ICI test using 0.25 mL of trimix of papaverine, PGE1 and phentolamine. Testosterone, prolactin and cholesterol levels were assessed. Patients received 25 mg sildenafil daily for 8 weeks, combined with twice weekly ICI with 0.25 mL of trimix. After treatment, the Erection Hardness Score (EHS), penile CDUS with ICI and ED Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: The mean (SD) SHIM-5 score before treatment was 8.3 (0.5) in 15 of the 40 men and 6.3 (0.4) in 25. Penile haemodynamics were normal in five (13%), showed arterial insufficiency in five (13%), venous occlusive disease in 26 (65%) and mixed vascular in four (10%). There was an improved SHIM-5 score in 28 (70%) patients, as shown by their haemodynamic values, duration of erection and EHS with therapy, and 66% satisfaction with treatment. Adverse effects (penile pain, headache, facial flushing, dyspepsia, nasal congestion, dizziness) were reported in 17 patients (43%). CONCLUSION: Chronic use of trimix plus daily low-dose sildenafil improved penile haemodynamics in these patients with ED not responding to on-demand phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors or ICI with PGE1 monotherapy.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP), detrusor wall thickness (DWT), prostate volume (PV) and serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels for detecting bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) and predicting acute urinary retention (AUR) secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 135 men who presented with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement were enrolled in the study; among them, 50 presented with AUR. Thirty normal men in the same age group were included and represented a control group for normative data. Their evaluation included a digital rectal examination, International Prostate Symptom Score and quality-of-life question, uroflowmetry and serum total PSA assay. Transabdominal ultrasonography was used to measure the PV, IPP DWT and post-void residual urine volume. Pressure-flow urodynamic studies were used as the reference standard test for BOO, differentiating obstructed from unobstructed bladders. DWT, IPP, PV and total PSA level served as index tests. To compare the usefulness of the various indices, the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver-operator characteristic curves was calculated for each index. RESULTS: According to presentation and urodynamic studies, patients were classified into three groups: Group 1 (no BOO), 50 patients with a BOO index (BOOI) of <40; group 2 (BOO), 35 with a BOOI of >40; and group 3 (AUR), 50 who presented with AUR. The IPP, DWT, PV and PSA levels differed significantly between obstructed and unobstructed patients, with a significant correlation with the BOOI. The AUC for IPP, DWT, PSA and PV were 0.885, 0.783, 0.745 and 0.678, respectively. The IPP threshold at 8 mm provided the best diagnostic accuracy (80%) for detecting BOO, followed by combined DWT and IPP (77.6%). Between patients with and without AUR, there was a highly significant difference in IPP, DWT and PSA; a combined IPP threshold of >8 mm and DWT >2 mm detected AUR in 45 of 50 patients (90%). CONCLUSION: All four noninvasive indices were correlated significantly with BOOI. The IPP as a single variable and combined with DWT predicted BOO and AUR better than PSA or PV.
