Sexual Rehabilitation After Nerve-Sparing Radical Prostatectomy: Free-of-Charge Phosphodiesterase Type 5 Inhibitor Administration Improves Compliance to Treatment

A contemporary review of the treatments and challenges associated with penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy including a proposed optimal approach

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies affecting men worldwide. Despite advancements in understanding prostate anatomy and minimally invasive approaches to surgical treatment, surgery can have significant adverse effects on sexual function. Penile rehabilitation strategies have emerged as a promising approach to mitigate the impact of prostate cancer treatments on erectile function and improve quality of life. Several methods have been employed for penile rehabilitation, including pharmacotherapy, vacuum erection devices, intracavernous injections, and emerging novel techniques. Yet, there is no consensus on the exact programs or timing of initiation that should be utilized for optimal recovery after surgery. This review discusses various rehabilitation protocols and long-term outcomes and explores the cost-effectiveness of different interventions. Additionally, this review discusses the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to penile rehabilitation which includes patient education, counseling, and the selection of an appropriate rehabilitation strategy tailored to each individual's needs and preferences. Continued research and collaboration among healthcare professionals are essential to refine rehabilitation approaches and ensure optimal outcomes for patients with prostate cancer.

Sustainable long-term results on postoperative sexual activity after radical prostatectomy when a clinical sexologist is included in the sexual rehabilitation process. A retrospective study on 7 years postoperative outcome

Introduction

The aim of this study was to perform a retrospective evaluation of long-term sustainability of a postoperative combined penile and sexual rehabilitation program involving a clinical sexologist (CS) for preoperative fully potent men undergoing daVinci robotic radical prostatectomy (dVRP) regardless of whether preservation of the neurovascular bundles was performed or not.

Material and methods

The study included 79 preoperatively potent and sexually active patients (aged 45–74 years, mean 61) that had undergone a dVRP due to localized prostate cancer and during the 1^st postoperative year participated in a combined penile and sexual rehabilitation program involving a CS. The subjects were followed up with the same interview and questionnaires at approximately 1, 3 and 7 years postoperatively. The interview and questionnaires addressed erectile function (EF), erectile dysfunction (ED) treatment, frequency of penetrating sexual activity, patient’s perceptions of sexual life (LISAT-8).

Results

One year postoperatively, 84% of patients were sexually active with penetrating sex, 15% with unassisted normal erections. 45% found their postoperative sexual life satisfactory (LISAT-8, question #6). Three years postoperatively, 76 patients were evaluable, 73% were sexually active with penetrating sex, 19% with unassisted normal erections. Furthermore, 56% of patients found their postoperative sexual life to be satisfactory. Seven years postoperatively, 74 patients were evaluable, 74% were sexually active with penetrating sex, 44% with unassisted normal erections. A total of 59% of patients found their postoperative sexual life to be satisfactory. The reasons for not having penetrating sex were diverse.

Conclusions

Involvement of a CS in a postoperative combined penile and sexual rehabilitation program appears to improve the possibility of an acceptable sexual life and function one year after surgery. These results appear to be sustainable in the long-term.

Management of erectile dysfunction following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to summarize evidences about the efficacy of available treatments for erectile disfunction after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature review searching on PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases was performed in December 2019. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Population consisted of patients with erectile disfunction after RARP (P), conservative and surgical intervention were considered of interest (I). No comparator was considered mandatory (C). Outcomes of interest were the recovery of erectile function after conservative treatments and sexual function after surgical treatments (O).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies were included. Seven studies focused on the use of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i) alone (five studies) or associated with other treatments (two studies). All the studies confirmed the efficacy of PDE5i, while the most promising association is with vacuum pump erectile devices. Two studies investigated topical treatments, namely low intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy and alprostadil. Low intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy may be a promising option in patients in whom nerve-sparing surgery was performed. The use of alprostadil could be an effective alternative to intracorporeal injection in those who underwent non-nerve-sparing surgery. One study focused and confirmed the efficacy of penile implants. Furthermore, one study reported the efficacy of a multi-modal treatment with preoperative medication, showing the benefits of a multimodal approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Penile rehabilitation with PDE5i is effective after nerve sparing RARP. The association of PDE5i with vacuum devices could led to a faster recovery. A multimodal approach with preoperative specific care seems to be effective to fasten erectile function recovery.

Efficacy and safety of avanafil 200 mg versus sildenafil 100 mg in the treatment of erectile dysfunction after robot-assisted unilateral nerve-sparing prostatectomy: A prospective multicentre study

Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors represent the standard treatment of erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing prostatectomy. Avanafil is a second-generation phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor with a high selectivity for phosphodiesterase type 5 isoform. To date, there are no studies comparing the outcomes of avanafil versus sildenafil in this scenario. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of avanafil versus sildenafil as a drug for post-prostatectomy rehabilitation. Overall, 160 patients submitted to robot-assisted nerve-sparing prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer at three hospitals were enrolled for the present study. After 6 months of treatment, patients in the two groups showed no significantly different sexual function scores, except for the Erection Hardness Score and Sexual Encounter Profile-Q2 that were higher in the Sildenafil group. Adverse events in the Avanafil group occurred in four (5%) patients and in 16 (20%) patients in the Sildenafil group. According to our experience, in patients undergoing nerve-sparing prostatectomy, penile rehabilitation with avanafil compared to sildenafil showed a lower ability to produce a valid erection in the initial phase of sexual intercourse, a difference that disappears in the continuation of the same. Avanafil showed a greater tolerance profile with a lower rate of AEs and discontinuation of therapy due to AEs.

Penile Rehabilitation: The "Up"-date

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to review the penile rehabilitation literature published since the beginning of 2017. Specific emphasis was placed on determining how the new findings increase our understanding of the mechanisms leading to recovery of erectile function after pelvic surgery and to identify potential focus areas for future studies.

Recent Findings

A meta-analysis of penile rehabilitation after prostatectomy was published in early 2017 reporting that PDE-5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection (ICI) therapy and vacuum erection devices (VED) improved erectile function; however, the benefit was not observed after a washout period. Preclinical studies have identified potential regenerative therapies after cavernous nerve injury.

Summary

While significant methodological challenges remain, recent literature suggests benefits to starting penile rehabilitation immediately after surgery, but not extending past 1 year post-operatively. The cost-benefit ratio of penile rehabilitation remains unclear; however, decreasing costs of PDE-5 inhibitors as well as improvements in characterizing post-surgical erectile dysfunction may help to personalize penile rehabilitation, improve outcomes and improve the cost-benefit ratio. Better and more consistent trial design is needed to develop the optimal regimen(s) for restoring sexual function in men. Finally, future studies to translate promising preclinical regeneration therapies to humans are also needed.