Hsu Geng-Long, Chen Heng-Shuen, Hsieh Cheng-Hsing, Ling Pei-Ling, Wen Hsien-Sheng, Liu Li-Jen, Chen Cheng-Wen, Liu Ming-Wei
Microsurgical Potency Reconstruction and Research Center, Taiwan Adventist Hospital, Sec 2, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.
J Androl. 2006 Sep-Oct;27(5):700-6. doi: 10.2164/jandrol.106.000737. Epub 2006 Jun 14.
There is currently controversy on whether the insufficient response to penile venous surgery done in an attempt to restore erectile function is due to recurrent or residual veins. In order to elucidate this issue, we report a study on those patients who failed to respond to the first venous surgery and subsequently underwent or declined a second operation. From July 1996 to July 2003, a total of 83 patients, aged 25 to 83, who were dissatisfied with their first venous surgery and were later diagnosed with a persistent veno-occlusive dysfunction via our dual cavernosography, were recruited into our study. Subsequently, 45 men underwent penile venous stripping surgery for a second time and were assigned to the surgery group, whereas the remaining 38 men were subject to follow-up and routine management and were assigned to the control group. All were evaluated with the abridged 5-item version of the international index of erectile function (IIEF-5) every 6 months for 1 to 5 years and cavernosogram, if necessary. In the surgery group their preoperative IIEF-5 score was 10.1 +/- 3.7, which increased to 17.1 +/- 3.2 (P < .001) after the first surgery and further increased to 20.7 +/- 3.1 (P < .001) after a second venous stripping of the cavernosal vein that was consistently demonstrated on the cavernosogram. Overall, 41 men (91.1%) reported a positive response to further venous surgery, with more satisfactory coitus, after the residual veins were stripped thoroughly, although eventually 4, 3, and 3 men required additional oral sildenafil, penile implant, and intracavernosal injection, respectively. The follow-up period ranged from 12 months to 72 months, with an average of 37.0 +/- 11.5 months. In the control group, however, their corresponding IIEF-5 score changed from 17.4 +/- 2.9 to 16.9 +/- 3.2 (P > .05). Finally, 11, 7, and 8 men required additional oral sildenafil, penile implant, and intracavernosal injection, respectively. Although there was no statistical significance between the 2 groups in the first postoperative IIEF-5 scores, there was a significant difference in their IIEF-5 after further venous surgery. In this study, we propose that the clinical relapse of erectile dysfunction is a result of "residual" veins rather than "recurrent" ones.
目前,对于阴茎静脉手术在恢复勃起功能方面反应不足是由于静脉复发还是残留存在争议。为了阐明这个问题,我们报告了一项针对那些对首次静脉手术无反应且随后接受或拒绝二次手术的患者的研究。1996年7月至2003年7月,共有83名年龄在25至83岁之间、对首次静脉手术不满意且后来通过我们的双重海绵体造影被诊断为持续性静脉闭塞功能障碍的患者被纳入我们的研究。随后,45名男性第二次接受了阴茎静脉剥脱手术并被分配到手术组,而其余38名男性接受随访和常规管理并被分配到对照组。在1至5年的时间里,每6个月对所有患者使用勃起功能国际指数简化5项版(IIEF - 5)进行评估,必要时进行海绵体造影。手术组患者术前IIEF - 5评分为10.1±3.7,首次手术后升至17.1±3.2(P <.001),在海绵体造影持续显示海绵体静脉二次剥脱后进一步升至20.7±3.1(P <.001)。总体而言,41名男性(91.1%)报告在残留静脉被彻底剥脱后对进一步的静脉手术有积极反应,性交更满意,尽管最终分别有4名、3名和3名男性需要额外口服西地那非、阴茎植入和海绵体内注射。随访期为12个月至72个月,平均为37.0±11.5个月。然而,在对照组中,他们相应的IIEF - 5评分从17.4±2.9变为16.9±3.2(P>.05)。最后,分别有分别有11名、7名和8名男性需要额外口服西地那非、阴茎植入和海绵体内注射。虽然两组术后首次IIEF - 5评分无统计学差异,但进一步静脉手术后他们的IIEF - 5评分存在显著差异。在本研究中,我们提出勃起功能障碍的临床复发是“残留”静脉而非“复发”静脉的结果。