INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is an increasing health problem that demands effective treatment. There is evidence that phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is) and psychological intervention (PI) are effective treatment options; however, little is known about their comparative efficacy and the efficacy of combined treatments. AIM: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of PI, PDE5-Is, and their combination in the treatment of ED. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was ED symptoms, and secondary outcome was sexual satisfaction of the patient. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in order to identify relevant articles published between 1998 and 2012. We included randomized controlled trials and controlled trials comparing PI with PDE5-I treatment or one of them against a combination of both. RESULTS: Eight studies with a total number of 562 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the included studies are inconclusive, though they show a trend towards a larger effect of combined treatment compared with PI or PDE5-I treatment alone. The meta-analysis found that, overall, combined treatment was more efficacious for ED symptoms than PDE5-I treatment or PI alone. Combined treatment was more efficacious than PDE5-I use alone on sexual satisfaction. No differences were found between PDE5-Is and PI as stand-alone treatments. None of the moderators (treatment duration, methodological quality, or researcher allegiance) altered the effects. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of PI and PDE5-Is is a promising strategy for a favorable outcome in ED and can be considered as a first-choice option for ED patients. Stronger RCTs are required to confirm this initial finding.
INTRODUCTION:Erectile dysfunction (ED) is an increasing health problem that demands effective treatment. There is evidence that phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is) and psychological intervention (PI) are effective treatment options; however, little is known about their comparative efficacy and the efficacy of combined treatments. AIM: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of PI, PDE5-Is, and their combination in the treatment of ED. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was ED symptoms, and secondary outcome was sexual satisfaction of the patient. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in order to identify relevant articles published between 1998 and 2012. We included randomized controlled trials and controlled trials comparing PI with PDE5-I treatment or one of them against a combination of both. RESULTS: Eight studies with a total number of 562 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the included studies are inconclusive, though they show a trend towards a larger effect of combined treatment compared with PI or PDE5-I treatment alone. The meta-analysis found that, overall, combined treatment was more efficacious for ED symptoms than PDE5-I treatment or PI alone. Combined treatment was more efficacious than PDE5-I use alone on sexual satisfaction. No differences were found between PDE5-Is and PI as stand-alone treatments. None of the moderators (treatment duration, methodological quality, or researcher allegiance) altered the effects. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of PI and PDE5-Is is a promising strategy for a favorable outcome in ED and can be considered as a first-choice option for ED patients. Stronger RCTs are required to confirm this initial finding.
Authors: G Corona; S Filippi; P Comelio; N Bianchi; F Frizza; M Dicuio; G Rastrelli; S Concetti; A Sforza; L Vignozzi; M Maggi Journal: Int J Impot Res Date: 2021-03-21 Impact factor: 2.896
Authors: Faysal A Yafi; Lawrence Jenkins; Maarten Albersen; Giovanni Corona; Andrea M Isidori; Shari Goldfarb; Mario Maggi; Christian J Nelson; Sharon Parish; Andrea Salonia; Ronny Tan; John P Mulhall; Wayne J G Hellstrom Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 52.329