| Literature DB >> 29430250 |
Héctor A Corredor Ayala1, José Pablo Saffon Cuartas2, Diana Cerquera Cleves3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the response to low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy in a group of patients with organic vascular erectile dysfunction.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29430250 PMCID: PMC5752979 DOI: 10.1155/2017/1843687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Urol ISSN: 1687-6369
Baseline characteristics of the study group.
| Variable | Value,∗ median (range)/frequency (percent) |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 58 (24–83) |
| Baseline EHS | |
|
| 95 (13.4) |
|
| 143 (20.1) |
|
| 282 (39.7) |
|
| 190 (26.8) |
| Smokers | 266 (37.5) |
| Patients in an established relationship | 495 (69.7) |
| Previous treatment | 430 (60.6) |
| Duration of dysfunction (years) | 3.9 (0–50) |
|
| |
| Diabetes I | 16 (2.3) |
| Diabetes II | 140 (19.7) |
| Dyslipidemia | 233 (32.8) |
| Hypertension | 228 (32.1) |
| Hypertriglyceridemia | 44 (6.2) |
| Acute myocardial infarction | 19 (2.7) |
| Malignant prostate disease (in remission) | 3 (0.4) |
| Prostatitis | 7 (1) |
| Benign tumour of the prostate | 35 (4.9) |
| Kidney transplant | 2 (0.3) |
| Sexually transmitted diseases | 4 (0.5) |
| Cerebrovascular accident | 6 (0.8) |
| Peyronie's disease | 7 (1) |
| HIV infection | 4 (0.6) |
| Heart surgery | 24 (3.4) |
| Vascular surgery | 31 (4.4) |
| Prostate surgery | 21 (3) |
| Circumcision | 100 (14.1) |
| Testicular surgery | 23 (3.2) |
| Vasectomy | 79 (11.1) |
| Spinal surgery | 17 (2.4) |
HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; ∗continuous variables are expressed as median (range) and categorical variables as frequency (percentage).
Figure 1EHS progression during follow-up.
Stratified analysis of the ability to penetrate.
| Examination | Adjunctive therapy | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | ||
| Basal | % patients with EHS ≥ 3 | 26.6% (21.3 to 31.8) | 26.8% (22.7 to 31.0) |
| First examination ( | % patients with EHS ≥ 3 | 49.1% (43.1 to 55.0) | 41.0% (36.4 to 45.6) |
| Absolute difference∗ | 22.5% (14.6 to 30.4) | 14.1% (7.9 to 20.3) | |
| Second examination ( | % patients with EHS ≥ 3 | 36.7% (28.9 to 44.3) | 38.5% (32.6 to 44.4) |
| Absolute difference∗ | 10.1% (0.8 to 19.4) | 11.7% (4.7 to 18.9) | |
∗Absolute difference in the percentage of patients able to penetrate, with a confidence interval of 95%, compared to baseline.