Literature DB >> 14963464

A comparative, crossover study of the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with evidence of arteriogenic erectile dysfunction.

P Perimenis1, K Gyftopoulos, K Giannitsas, S A Markou, I Tsota, A Chrysanthopoulou, A Athanasopoulos, G Barbalias.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to establish and compare the efficacy and safety of sildenafil and apomorphine in men with arteriogenic erectile dysfunction (ED). In all, 43 men with ED and postinjection max penile systolic velocity <25 cm/s in repeated Doppler ultrasonography were included. Of these, 24 men started on apomorphine 2 mg and 19 on sildenafil 50 mg, the doses titrated up to 3 and 100 mg according to effectiveness and tolerability. Safety was evaluated according to adverse events (AEs) and patient withdrawal. Efficacy was the percentage of attempts resulting in erections firm enough for intercourse, based on event log data. The incidence of AEs with apomorphine 3 mg was higher than with sildenafil 100 mg. Two men on apomorphine 3 mg discontinued treatment due to AEs. The overall success rate of sildenafil was 63.7% compared to 32.1% of apomorphine (Pearson chi(2), P<0.01). Of all men, 25 (58.1%) responded to sildenafil 50 mg without the need for dose increase, while only one responded to apomorphine 2 mg. The response to sildenafil 50 mg was age related (analysis of variance, p=0.04). Satisfaction was reported by 76.75 and 13.95% of patients for sildenafil and apomorphine, respectively, but 20.9% were not satisfied with any of the two drugs. In conclusion, this study provides clear evidence that sildenafil, even at 50 mg dose, is more effective than apomorphine 3 mg in men with arteriogenic ED. The fact that one out of five patients is not satisfied with the above-studied drugs shows that new oral agents need to be evaluated for the treatment of this disorder.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14963464     DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijir.3901119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Impot Res        ISSN: 0955-9930            Impact factor:   2.896


  5 in total

Review 1.  A comparative review of apomorphine formulations for erectile dysfunction : recommendations for use in the elderly.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Felix K-H Chun; Andrea Salonia; Giuseppe Zanni; Federico Dehò; Luigi Barbieri; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.923

2.  Sildenafil combined with continuous positive airway pressure for treatment of erectile dysfunction in men with obstructive sleep apnea.

Authors:  Petros Perimenis; Angelis Konstantinopoulos; Kyriakos Karkoulias; Spyros Markou; Paraskevi Perimeni; Konstantinos Spyropoulos
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  A comparative review of the options for treatment of erectile dysfunction: which treatment for which patient?

Authors:  Konstantinos Hatzimouratidis; Dimitrios G Hatzichristou
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Looking to the future for erectile dysfunction therapies.

Authors:  Konstantinos Hatzimouratidis; Dimitrios G Hatzichristou
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 5.  The treatment of erectile dysfunction in patients with neurogenic disease.

Authors:  Anand N Shridharani; William O Brant
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2016-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.