Evidence Hub

Kidney disease quality of life of Japanese dialysis patients who desire administration of sildenafil and the treatment of erectile dysfunction using sildenafil

Hyodo T, Ishida H, Masui N, Taira T, Yamamoto S, Oka M, Uchida T, Endo T et al.

Therapeutic apheresis and dialysis : official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy, 2004

37 participants

Abstract

Erectile dysfunction (ED) is common among patients on dialysis therapy. In the present study, we attempted administration of sildenafil to Japanese patients undergoing dialysis. In order to diagnose ED before prescribing sildenafil, we assessed the hemodialysis patients who desired sildenafil by using the five items version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). In addition, the characteristics of the quality of life in Japanese hemodialysis patients who desired sildenafil were assessed using the kidney disease quality of life (KDQOL). To all 37 male subjects (mean age of 53.8 +/- 10.4 years) attending the Outpatient Hemodialysis Unit at Atsugi Clinic (Atsugi City, Japan), it was explained by their primary doctor that the treatment of ED with sildenafil was possible. As a result, 10 patients (27.0%) desired the treatment. For eight patients, ED was diagnosed by IIEF-5 prior to prescription of sildenafil. The mean IIEF-5 scores were 6.13 +/- 4.67 points. Sildenafil was prescribed to five patients (three diabetic, two non-diabetic) and sexual function was improved in three cases. The main adverse effect was found to be ventricular arrhythmia in one case. As for KDQOL, the group desiring sildenafil showed significantly high values in Dialysis Staff Encouragement and Patient Satisfaction. Among the other nine dialysis patients (five diabetic, four non-diabetic; mean age of 58.1 +/- 8.9 years) who visited the ED department of Ishida Hospital (Asahikawa City,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 37 participants or records.

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