Isadora Martins da Fonseca Pedroso, Maria Luíza Souza Siqueira, Thaísy Andressa Bastos Primo de Sousa Santos, Keyla de Paula Barbosa, Elio Armando Nunes de Lima, Andréia Cristina Ribeiro Izidro Sampaio, Katiane da Costa Cunha, Marianne Lucena da Silva, Aline Teixeira Alves
{"title":"Conservative treatment of sexual dysfunction among men undergoing prostate cancer treatment: a systematic review.","authors":"Isadora Martins da Fonseca Pedroso, Maria Luíza Souza Siqueira, Thaísy Andressa Bastos Primo de Sousa Santos, Keyla de Paula Barbosa, Elio Armando Nunes de Lima, Andréia Cristina Ribeiro Izidro Sampaio, Katiane da Costa Cunha, Marianne Lucena da Silva, Aline Teixeira Alves","doi":"10.1093/sxmrev/qeae045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>One of the changes caused by pelvic cancers is the decrease in patients' sexual function, which influences their quality of life (QoL) during and after treatment. Sexual dysfunction (SD) is associated with severe ejaculatory dysfunction, sexual dissatisfaction, reduced libido and sexual desire, decreased intensity of orgasm, difficulty in erection, and lower sexual frequency.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of conservative treatments (nonsurgical and nonpharmacologic) for SD in males with pelvic cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic searches were performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, Embase, and VHL databases in September 2023 by using MeSH terms related to population, study design, intervention, and outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only prostate cancer studies were included due to a lack of studies in other treatments. Studies used pelvic floor muscle training (8 studies); biofeedback (1 study); a penile vibrator (1 study); electrostimulation (2 studies); shock wave therapy (2 studies); aerobic, resistance, and flexibility exercises (2 studies); and a vacuum erection device (1 study). All articles assessed sexual function and reported improvements in the intervention group, including 5 with no differences between the groups. Articles involving shock wave therapy described improvements in SD but were not clinically relevant. Studies evaluating QoL reported benefits in the experimental groups. Adverse effects of a vacuum erection device and penile vibrator were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Conservative treatments are more effective than others in treating SD in men with prostate cancer. Further studies are needed to assess the unwanted effects of these treatments. In this study, we found evidence that this type of therapy improves sexual function and QoL in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":21813,"journal":{"name":"Sexual medicine reviews","volume":" ","pages":"710-719"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual medicine reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sxmrev/qeae045","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: One of the changes caused by pelvic cancers is the decrease in patients' sexual function, which influences their quality of life (QoL) during and after treatment. Sexual dysfunction (SD) is associated with severe ejaculatory dysfunction, sexual dissatisfaction, reduced libido and sexual desire, decreased intensity of orgasm, difficulty in erection, and lower sexual frequency.
Objectives: This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of conservative treatments (nonsurgical and nonpharmacologic) for SD in males with pelvic cancer.
Methods: Systematic searches were performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, Embase, and VHL databases in September 2023 by using MeSH terms related to population, study design, intervention, and outcome.
Results: Only prostate cancer studies were included due to a lack of studies in other treatments. Studies used pelvic floor muscle training (8 studies); biofeedback (1 study); a penile vibrator (1 study); electrostimulation (2 studies); shock wave therapy (2 studies); aerobic, resistance, and flexibility exercises (2 studies); and a vacuum erection device (1 study). All articles assessed sexual function and reported improvements in the intervention group, including 5 with no differences between the groups. Articles involving shock wave therapy described improvements in SD but were not clinically relevant. Studies evaluating QoL reported benefits in the experimental groups. Adverse effects of a vacuum erection device and penile vibrator were reported.
Conclusion: Conservative treatments are more effective than others in treating SD in men with prostate cancer. Further studies are needed to assess the unwanted effects of these treatments. In this study, we found evidence that this type of therapy improves sexual function and QoL in this population.