Among potent men post radical prostatectomy, does the need for phosphodiesterase inhibitors have an impact on sexual bother scores?

Authors

  • Sanoj Punnen,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Urology, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Matthew R. Cooperberg,

    1. Department of Urology, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Natalia Sadetsky,

    1. Department of Urology, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Peter R. Carroll

    1. Department of Urology, UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
    Search for more papers by this author

Sanoj Punnen, University of California, San Francisco, Department of Urology, 1600 Divisadero St, Box 1695, San Francisco, CA 94143-1695, USA. e-mail: PunnenSP@urology.ucsf.edu

Abstract

Study Type – Therapy (case series)

Level of Evidence 4

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?

Although phosphodiesterase inhibitor use post radical prostatectomy improves potency, little is known about its affects on sexual bother. We found no difference in sexual bother scores between patients who use and do not use phosphodiesterase inhibitors. This suggests that the current definition of potency, inclusive of medication use, is valid with respect to sexual bother.

OBJECTIVE

  • • To determine whether the current definition of potency, inclusive of phosphodiesterase inhibitor (PDEi) use, is valid with respect to sexual bother (SB). This will be assessed by characterizing the effect of PDEi use on SB scores in men who are potent post radical prostatectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

  • • The study population consisted of patients who were potent both before and after radical prostatectomy, with at least 2 years of follow-up.
  • • Disease-specific quality of life data were evaluated by the University of California, Los Angeles, Prostate Cancer Index (PCI) survey.
  • • The relationships between changes in sexual function (SF) and SB and use of PDEi over time were evaluated by mixed model analysis controlling for age, clinical risk group, marital status, and time of PCI assessment.

RESULTS

  • • Of the 246 patients who met the study criteria, 39% reported PDEi use at some point after treatment.
  • • PDEi use was not associated with improved SF (P= 0.81).
  • • Furthermore, PDEi use was not associated with a change in SB (P= 0.36).
  • • Both SF and SB were significantly associated with time of assessment and age, and SF and SB each improved over time.
  • • In addition, SB was significantly associated with marital status.

CONCLUSIONS

  • • In this analysis, there was no difference in SF scores between men who were potent with or without the use of PDEi.
  • • Furthermore, there was no difference in SB scores between men who were potent with or without the use of PDEi.
  • • This suggests that the current, inclusive, definition of potency is valid with respect to SB.

Ancillary