| Literature DB >> 26689523 |
A Ruffo1, M Capece1, D Prezioso1, G Romeo1, E Illiano1, L Romis2, G Di Lauro2, F Iacono1.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The primary goal in the management strategy of a patient with ED would be to determine its etiology and cure it when possible, and not just to treat the symptoms alone. One of the new therapeutic strategies is the use of low intensity extracorporeal shockwave (LISW) therapy. The mechanism of shockwave therapy is not completely clear. It is suggested that LISW induces neovascularization and improvement of cavernosal arterial flow which can lead to an improvement of erectile function by releasing NO, VEGF and PCNA.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26689523 PMCID: PMC4756974 DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0386
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Braz J Urol ISSN: 1677-5538 Impact factor: 1.541
The pretreatment characteristics of population.
| Variable | Patients | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.39 | ||
| Mean±SD | 59.93±12.16 | ||
| N.of subjects analysed | 31 | ||
|
| 0.50 | ||
| Mean±SD | 3.66±4.57 | ||
| N.of subjects analysed | 31 | ||
|
| 6.45 | 0.12 | |
| Proportion | 2/31 | ||
Analysis of self-reported measures at baseline, 1-month and 3-month follow up by treatment cohort.
| Variable | Baseline | Follow-up 1 month | p value | Follow-up 3 months | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 16.54±6.35 | 21.13±6.31 | P=0.0075 | 21.03±6.38 | p=0.0096 |
|
| 61 (yes) | 86 (yes) | P=0.0292 | 89 (yes) | P=0.0112 |
| 38 (no) | 13 (no) | 10 (no) | |||
| 2 drop-out | |||||
|
| 32 (yes) | 58 (yes) | P=0.0402 | 62 (yes) | P=0.0207 |
| 67 (no) | 41 (no) | 37 (no) | |||
| 2 drop-out |
(IIEF-EF): International Index of Erectile Function; (SEP-Q2): Sexual Encounter Profile-Q2; (SEP-Q3): Sexual Encounter Profile-Q3
Figure 1IIEF-EF score at baseline and after 1 month follow-up
Figure 3Dispersion date IIEF score baseline and 3 month follow-up
Analysis of self-reported measures at 1-month and 3-month follow up by treatment cohort.
| Variable | Follow-up 1 Month | Follow-up 3 Month | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| GAQ-Q1 (%) | 89 (yes) | 62 (yes) | P=0.141 |
| 10 (no) | 38 (no) | ||
| 2 droup-out | 2 droup-out | ||
| GAQ-Q2 (%) | 79 (yes) | 76 (yes) | P=0.7259 |
| 20 (no) | 24 (no) | ||
| 2 droup-out | 2 droup-out |
(GAQ-Q1): Global Assessment Question- Q1; (GAQ-Q2): Global Assessment Question- Q2