The timing of penile rehabilitation after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy affects the recovery of erectile function.

OBJECTIVE: To define if erectile function (EF) outcomes were better in men with early institution of penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy (RP), as one of the mechanisms by which patients fail to recover EF after RP is collagenization of corporal smooth muscle with subsequent venous leak development, and rehabilitation is aimed at preventing these structural alterations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised patients who: (i) had clinically organ-confined prostate cancer; (ii) had fully functional erections, corroborated by the partner; (iii) had bilateral nerve-sparing RP; and (iv) committed to pharmacological penile rehabilitation. Patients completed the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) serially after RP. Patients were instructed to obtain three erections/week using initially sildenafil, and if unsuccessful, then intracavernous injections. Patients were subdivided into those starting rehabilitation at < 6 months after RP (early) and those starting at > or = 6 months after RP (delayed). RESULTS: There were 48 patients in the early group and 36 in the delayed group; patients in both groups were matched for age, comorbidity status and baseline EF. The mean duration after RP at the time of starting penile rehabilitation was 2 and 7 months in the early and delayed groups, respectively (P < 0.01). At 2 years after surgery there was a highly statistically significant difference in IIEF EF domain score between the early and delayed groups (22 vs 16, P < 0.001). There were also statistically significant differences between the groups in the percentage of men at 2 years after RP who had unassisted functional erections and sildenafil-assisted functional erections (58% vs 30%, P < 0.01; 86% vs 45%, P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that delaying the start of penile rehabilitation after RP is associated with poorer outcomes for EF.

Penile rehabilitation following radical prostatectomy: predicting success.

INTRODUCTION: It has been suggested that the institution of a pharmacologically based penile rehabilitation program in the early stages after radical prostatectomy (RP) may benefit some patients. AIM: This analysis was conducted to define if predictors of successful outcome with pharmacological penile rehabilitation following RP could be identified. METHODS: Retrospective statistical analysis was performed on a large database of patients who had participated in a post-RP rehabilitation program. Inclusion criteria included: presence of functional erections permitting sexual intercourse pre-RP and commencement of rehabilitation within 12 months of RP. Patients were instructed to obtain a penetration-rigidity erection on at least three occasions per week and to continue this regimen until at least 18 months after RP using either sildenafil or intracavernosal injection therapy (if oral therapy failed). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and visual analog scale erectile rigidity assessment. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to generate predictors of erectile function (EF) outcomes with penile rehabilitation. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients constituted the study population. Mean patient age and duration post-RP at commencement of the rehabilitation program were 59 +/- 10 years and 7 +/- 3 months, respectively. Sixty-seven percent of operations were bilateral nerve sparing (BNS), 11% unilateral nerve sparing (NS), and 22% non-NS. Comorbidities included hypertension 22%, dyslipidemia 30%, coronary artery disease 7%, and diabetes 2%. Preoperative mean self-reported, partner-corroborated erectile rigidity during relations was 90 +/- 20%. At 18 months post-RP, 57% patients had partner-corroborated functional erections without phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors with a mean erectile rigidity during relations of 72 +/- 16% compared with 45 +/- 22% for those who denied functional erections postoperatively (P > 0.01). The IIEF-EF domain scores in these two cohorts were 21 +/- 7.5 and 13 +/- 9, respectively (P > 0.01). On multivariate analysis, factors that predicted failure of return of natural erections after RP having followed a rehabilitation program were age >60 years (relative risk [RR] = 1.3), non-BNS surgery (RR = 1.6), presence of >1 vascular comorbidity (RR = 2.1), commencement of rehabilitation >6 months post-RP (RR = 2.8), unsuccessful response to sildenafil at 12 months post-RP (RR = 4.5), and the use of trimix dose >50 units (RR = 8.1). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients committing to a pharmacological rehabilitation program had return of functional natural erections. Predictors of successful outcome included NS surgery, early post-RP presentation, young age, and absence of vascular comorbidities.

Erectile haemodynamic status after radical prostatectomy correlates with erectile functional outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To define haemodynamic changes after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RP) and the predictive value of these for the outcome of erectile function (EF), as although there are predictors of the recovery of EF, penile vascular changes might also affect the recovery of EF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective data were analysed from men who had RP followed by duplex penile Doppler ultrasonography (DUS) within 6 months of RP. All men had functional erections before RP, based on self-report and partner corroboration, and all completed the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire serially after RP. The EF, based on IIEF scores, was then correlated with the penile DUS results. RESULTS: In all, the study included 111 patients; 32 (29%) had normal erectile haemodynamics after RP, while 79 (71%) had abnormal haemodynamics. Twelve patients (11%) had a venous leak. There were no differences in mean patient age or comorbidity profile between those with and without haemodynamic changes. Comparing those with normal and abnormal haemodynamics, the mean IIEF EF domain scores were 25 and 17 (P = 0.025), the percentages of erectile rigidity at 18 months was 66% vs 35% (P = 0.013), the percentage of patients with normal EF domain scores was 28% vs 6% (P < 0.01), the percentage of patients with functional erections permitting sexual intercourse unassisted by pharmacological agents was 47% vs 22% (P = 0.018), and the percentage of patients responding to sildenafil citrate, as defined by vaginal penetration, was 72% vs 43% (P = 0.03), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this prospective study indicate that a patient's penile vascular status is correlated with their EF after RP.