Evidence Hub

Prognostic factors predicting successful response to sildenafil after radical cystoprostatectomy

El-Bahnasawy MS, Ismail T, Elsobky E, Alzalouey EI, Bazeed MA

Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology, 2008

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of sildenafil citrate in the management of erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical cystectomy (RC) and to define the different prognostic factors predicting the response to sildenafil in such a challenging group of patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred patients with ED following RC participated in an open-label, non-randomized, prospective, dose-escalation study. The median age of the patients was 53 years and the mean period after RC was 80.7 +/- 54.8 months. The study duration was 12 weeks, comprising a 4-week run-in period followed by two active treatment periods of 4 weeks each with 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil. Patients were assessed by means of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire at baseline and after each treatment period. At the end of the study, the Global Efficacy Assessment Question was used to evaluate treatment satisfaction. Factors affecting the patient's response to sildenafil were assessed by means of uni- and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS: The entire study group was suffering from severe ED at baseline, with a mean erectile function (EF) domain score of 6.5 +/- 0.93. EF scores improved to 12.2 +/- 7.76 and 18 +/- 10.3 with 50 and 100 mg of sildenafil, respectively. Sildenafil therapy significantly improved the ability of many patients to achieve and maintain an erection. The mean scores for question 3 of the IIEF were 1 +/- 0.14, 2.1 +/- 1.4 and 3 +/- 1.8 at baseline and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free