Evidence Hub

Oral phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors and priapism: A VigiBase analysis

Abbasi B, Shaw NM, Lui JL, Hakam N, Nabavizadeh B, Breyer BN

Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2024

550 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To explore the differences of priapism events among a diverse cohort taking erectogenic medicines (i.e., phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors [PDE5i] and intracavernousal drugs).

METHODS: We queried the World Health Organization global database of individual case safety reports (VigiBase) for records of the adverse drug reactions (ADR) with sildenafil, tadalafil, avanafil, vardenafil, papaverine, and alprostadil. Disproportionality analyses (case/non-case approach) were performed to assess the reporting odds ratio (ROR) of priapism reporting in PDE5i consumers compared to intracavernousal drug recipients.

RESULTS: From a total of 133 819 ADR events for erectogenic medications, 632 were priapism (PDE5is: n = 550, 0.41%; intracavernousal drugs: n = 82, 9.92%). Priapism disproportionality signals from intracavernousal drugs were 25 times stronger than PDE5is (ROR = 34.7; confidence interval [CI] 95%: 27.12-43.94 vs. ROR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.24-1.54). For all PDE5i agents, the 12-17 years age group had the highest ROR (9.49, 95% CI: 3.76-19.93) followed by 2-11 years (4.31, 95% CI: 1.57-9.4). Disproportionality signals for consumers under 18 for both all PDE5is as a whole (ROR = 4.57, 95% CI: 2.48-7.73) and sildenafil (ROR = 4.89, 95% CI: 2.51-8.62) were stronger than individuals 18 or older (ROR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.93-1.21 and ROR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.91-1.26, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: PDE5i use shows disproportionate priapism signals which are higher in young patients.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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. Reported size: 550 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