Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
PURPOSE: We compared erectile function status and satisfaction rates in patients who received treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) with sildenafil, intracavernous prostaglandin E1 (ICI) and penile implant surgery (IPP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 138 consecutive patients who received treatment for ED between April 2000 and April 2001 were considered candidates for study. Mean followup was 19.54 months. Of the patients 27 were not available for followup and 26 were not on any form of treatment. Of the patients receiving treatment for ED 85 were administered the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory for Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire and the Erectile Function Domain (EFD) of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire. Three treatment groups were identified, including 31 patients on sildenafil citrate, 22 on ICI and 32 who underwent IPP. Mean total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores in the 3 groups were considered for statistical evaluation. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in the total EDITS (25.59 versus 27.06, p = 0.48), EDITS Index (58.16 versus 61.15, p = 0.49) or EFD (22.91 versus 20.26, p = 0.12) score between the groups on ICI and sildenafil citrate, respectively. Total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores were significantly higher in patients who underwent IPP than those on sildenafil citrate (36.09 versus 27.06, p <0.001, 82.03 versus 61.51, p <0.001 and 27.88 versus 20.26, p <0.001, respectively). Total EDITS, EDITS Index and EFD scores were significantly higher in patients who underwent IPP than those on ICI (36.09 versus 25.59, 82.03 versus 58.16 and 27.88 versus 22.91, respectively, all p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: At a mean followup of 19.54 months patients who underwent penile implant surgery had significantly better erectile function and treatment satisfaction than those receiving sildenafil citrate and intracavernous prostaglandin E1.
Rajpurkar et al. (2003) studied this question.