{"title":"冲击波治疗勃起功能障碍:如何定义临床结果?在盲法、假对照试验中阴茎多普勒超声与新的视觉勃起硬度评分(V-EHS)的比较","authors":"Mathias Ferreira Schuh, Rodrigo Ribeiro Vieiralves, Luciano Alves Favorito","doi":"10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2024.9927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the last decade, several studies have proven the effectiveness of low-intensity shock waves (LI-ESWT), but with several factors that make it difficult to carry out systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To demonstrate the effectiveness of LI-ESWT and define the best tool for routine clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty-one participants with purely vasculogenic erectile dysfunction were selected and randomized to LI-ESWT or placebo. All patients underwent evaluation with The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), V-EHS (new visual scale), and standardized penile doppler ultrasound before and after shock wave therapy.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate erectile dysfunction, and the new V-EHS has demonstrated greater accuracy than Doppler in the diagnosis and follow-up of erectile dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the IIEF-5 as a control tool, we observed a clinical response after 1 month, with a greater increase in the shock wave therapy arm of +3.21 points compared to + 0.57 in the sham group. At six months, the treated group showed a mean increase of 4.71 points compared to baseline (p = 0.006), while those who received sham therapy had a decrease (case = +4.71 points vs. sham control = -1.0, p = 0.006). Based on this observed difference, we performed a comparative analysis between the V-EHS and penile doppler ultrasound to observe whether the test results corroborated the IIEF-5 findings. The correlation between V-EHS and IIEF-5 in the therapy group in the pre-therapy period was strong (r = 0.816, p < 0.001), and at 6 months it increased to very strong (r = 0.928, p < 0.001). Penile Doppler ultrasound did not show the same correlation strength with IIEF-5, presenting a moderate correlation at 6 months (Pearson correlation score = 0.540), as also demonstrated in the ROC curve through the V-EHS AUC = 0.963 (p = 0.001) vs. Doppler AUC = 0.713 (p = 0,290). Strengths and Limitations: The main strengths of the present study are the blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial and the comparison between penile Doppler and a new visual classification for erection hardness score. The limitations are the number of patients and the short follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate vasculogenic erectile dysfunction, with optimal results at 6 months. The new V-EHS offers a simple, reliable and reproducible assessment of erectile function.</p>","PeriodicalId":49283,"journal":{"name":"International Braz J Urol","volume":"51 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884628/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Erection Dysfunction: How to Define Clinical Outcomes? A Comparison Between Penile Doppler Ultrasound and a New Visual Erec-tion Hardness Score (V-EHS) During a Blinded, Sham-Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Mathias Ferreira Schuh, Rodrigo Ribeiro Vieiralves, Luciano Alves Favorito\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2024.9927\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the last decade, several studies have proven the effectiveness of low-intensity shock waves (LI-ESWT), but with several factors that make it difficult to carry out systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To demonstrate the effectiveness of LI-ESWT and define the best tool for routine clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty-one participants with purely vasculogenic erectile dysfunction were selected and randomized to LI-ESWT or placebo. All patients underwent evaluation with The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), V-EHS (new visual scale), and standardized penile doppler ultrasound before and after shock wave therapy.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate erectile dysfunction, and the new V-EHS has demonstrated greater accuracy than Doppler in the diagnosis and follow-up of erectile dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the IIEF-5 as a control tool, we observed a clinical response after 1 month, with a greater increase in the shock wave therapy arm of +3.21 points compared to + 0.57 in the sham group. At six months, the treated group showed a mean increase of 4.71 points compared to baseline (p = 0.006), while those who received sham therapy had a decrease (case = +4.71 points vs. sham control = -1.0, p = 0.006). Based on this observed difference, we performed a comparative analysis between the V-EHS and penile doppler ultrasound to observe whether the test results corroborated the IIEF-5 findings. The correlation between V-EHS and IIEF-5 in the therapy group in the pre-therapy period was strong (r = 0.816, p < 0.001), and at 6 months it increased to very strong (r = 0.928, p < 0.001). Penile Doppler ultrasound did not show the same correlation strength with IIEF-5, presenting a moderate correlation at 6 months (Pearson correlation score = 0.540), as also demonstrated in the ROC curve through the V-EHS AUC = 0.963 (p = 0.001) vs. Doppler AUC = 0.713 (p = 0,290). Strengths and Limitations: The main strengths of the present study are the blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial and the comparison between penile Doppler and a new visual classification for erection hardness score. The limitations are the number of patients and the short follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate vasculogenic erectile dysfunction, with optimal results at 6 months. The new V-EHS offers a simple, reliable and reproducible assessment of erectile function.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Braz J Urol\",\"volume\":\"51 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11884628/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Braz J Urol\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2024.9927\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Braz J Urol","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2024.9927","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Erection Dysfunction: How to Define Clinical Outcomes? A Comparison Between Penile Doppler Ultrasound and a New Visual Erec-tion Hardness Score (V-EHS) During a Blinded, Sham-Controlled Trial.
Background: In the last decade, several studies have proven the effectiveness of low-intensity shock waves (LI-ESWT), but with several factors that make it difficult to carry out systematic reviews.
Aim: To demonstrate the effectiveness of LI-ESWT and define the best tool for routine clinical assessment of erectile dysfunction.
Materials and methods: Twenty-one participants with purely vasculogenic erectile dysfunction were selected and randomized to LI-ESWT or placebo. All patients underwent evaluation with The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), V-EHS (new visual scale), and standardized penile doppler ultrasound before and after shock wave therapy.
Outcomes: LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate erectile dysfunction, and the new V-EHS has demonstrated greater accuracy than Doppler in the diagnosis and follow-up of erectile dysfunction.
Results: Using the IIEF-5 as a control tool, we observed a clinical response after 1 month, with a greater increase in the shock wave therapy arm of +3.21 points compared to + 0.57 in the sham group. At six months, the treated group showed a mean increase of 4.71 points compared to baseline (p = 0.006), while those who received sham therapy had a decrease (case = +4.71 points vs. sham control = -1.0, p = 0.006). Based on this observed difference, we performed a comparative analysis between the V-EHS and penile doppler ultrasound to observe whether the test results corroborated the IIEF-5 findings. The correlation between V-EHS and IIEF-5 in the therapy group in the pre-therapy period was strong (r = 0.816, p < 0.001), and at 6 months it increased to very strong (r = 0.928, p < 0.001). Penile Doppler ultrasound did not show the same correlation strength with IIEF-5, presenting a moderate correlation at 6 months (Pearson correlation score = 0.540), as also demonstrated in the ROC curve through the V-EHS AUC = 0.963 (p = 0.001) vs. Doppler AUC = 0.713 (p = 0,290). Strengths and Limitations: The main strengths of the present study are the blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial and the comparison between penile Doppler and a new visual classification for erection hardness score. The limitations are the number of patients and the short follow-up.
Conclusions: LI-ESWT has proven effective in the treatment of moderate vasculogenic erectile dysfunction, with optimal results at 6 months. The new V-EHS offers a simple, reliable and reproducible assessment of erectile function.