Evidence Hub

A prospective randomized study to compare pelvic floor rehabilitation and dapoxetine for treatment of lifelong premature ejaculation

Antonio Luigi Pastore, Giovanni Palleschi, Antonino Leto, Luca Pacini, Francesco Iori, Constantino Leonardo, Antonio Carbone

International Journal of Andrology, 2012

40 participants · 68 citations

Abstract

Premature ejaculation (PE) is the most common male sexual disorder. We compared pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation to on-demand treatment with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor dapoxetine in 40 men with lifelong PE (baseline intra-vaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) ≤1 min). Subjects were randomized into the following two treatment groups: (1) PFM rehabilitation or (2) 30 or 60 mg of on-demand dapoxetine. Total treatment time for both groups was 12 weeks, at the end of which, IELT mean values were calculated to compare the effectiveness of the two different therapeutic approaches. At the end of treatment, 11 of the 19 patients (57%) treated with rehabilitation were able to control the ejaculation reflex, with a mean IELT of 126.6 sec (range: 123.6-152.4 sec). In the dapoxetine group, after 12 weeks of therapy, 5 of 8 (62.5%) patients in the 30 mg subgroup and five of seven (72%) in the 60 mg subgroup had an IELT >180 sec (mean: 178.2 and 202.8 sec, respectively). The results obtained in the group treated with pelvic floor rehabilitation are promising, and this treatment represents an important cost reduction if compared to dapoxetine on-demand treatment. The present study confirms the data that are previously available in the literature on the efficacy and safety of the new inhibitor of serotonin reuptake, dapoxetine, as well as proposes and evaluates a new type of physical treatment that may be a viable therapeutic option for treatment of PE.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 40 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