ABSTRACT
In a double-blind, crossover designation penile intracavernous prostaglandin E1 and papaverine hydrochloride were compared in regard to effectiveness and safety in 52 patients investigated and treated for sexual erectile dysfunction. In evidence of the reliable effectiveness, prostaglandin E1 (20 micrograms/ml.) induced significant positive erectile response in 42 of 52 patients (81%). This rate reached 100% with neurogenic, hyperprolactinemic and/or psychogenic impotence. However, with papaverine hydrochloride (30 mg./ml.) and exclusively in cases of vasculogenic (most probably arteriogenic) impotence, negative erectile response was revealed as absent erection in 6 of 52 patients (11.5%) and nonrigid tumescence in 13 (25%) versus 2 (3.8%) and 8 (15.4%), respectively, with prostaglandin E1. Moreover, with prostaglandin E1 the regional pain was tolerable and transient, and the positive erectile response was not attended by priapism even in patients who formerly had priapism with papaverine hydrochloride. However, presently with prostaglandin E1 the relatively higher cost and shorter expiration period would probably limit its diagnostic and therapeutic use in Egypt, and probably in other developing countries.
