Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Management of Postprostatectomy Erectile Dysfunction

  • Chapter
Robotic Urologic Surgery

  • 686 Accesses

Abstract

The concept of early penile rehabilitation following radical prostatectomy started in the 1990s with the evolution of several dynamic themes regarding prostate cancer diagnosis and management. First, with the maturation of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, the detection of lower volume cancers changed the surgical margin rate and the rate of biochemical cures rose substantially, to the 80% to 90% range. The majority of our newly diagnosed tumors were histologic Gleason score 6/7 cancers and were pathologically organ confined. Recent cancer statistics for the year 2006 report that 91% of new prostate cancer cases are expected to be diagnosed at local or regional stages with five-year cancer-specific survivals approaching 100%.1 A second major theme of the 1990s was the substantial drop in patient age at diagnosis due to earlier screening with serum PSA testing and improved office-based ultrasound-guided biopsy techniques. In fact, the largest increase in prostate cancer incidence during the PSA era occurred in men under the age of 65. The Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry from 1995 to 1999 reported that 33% of all incident prostate cancer cases are now diagnosed in men under age 652–4 and this figure will invariably be higher in the subsequent five-year report.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:106–130.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Stanford JL, Stephenson RA, Coyle LM, et al. Prostate cancer trends 1973–1994. NIH publication no. 99–4543. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stephenson RA. Population based prostate cancer trends in the PSA era: data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. Monogr Urol 1998;19:3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Greene KL, Cowan JE, Cooperberg MR, et al. Who is the average patient presenting with Prostate Cancer? Urology 2005;66(suppl 5A):76–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Catalona WP, Basler JW. Return of erections and urinary continence following nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 1993;150: 905–907.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Quinlan DM, Epstein JI, Carter BS, Walsh P. Sexual function following radical prostatectomy: influence of preservation of neurovascular bundles. J Urol 1991;145:998–1002.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Walsh PC, Marschke P, Ricker D, et al. Patientreported urinary continence and sexual function after anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 2000;55:58–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rabbani F, Stapleton AM, Khattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. Factors predicting recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2000; 164:1929–1934.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Talcott JA, Rieker P, Propert KJ, et al. Patient reported impotence and incontinence after nervesparing radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:1117–1123.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jonler M, Messing EM, Rhodes PR, Bruskewitz RC. Sequelae of radical prostatectomy. Br J Urol 1994; 73:352–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Geary ES, Dendinger TE, Freiha FS, Stamey TA. Nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a different view. J Urol 1995;154:145–149.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Leandri P, Rossignol G, Gautier JR, Ramon J. Radical retropubic prostatectomy: morbidity and quality of life. Experience with 620 consecutive cases. J Urol 1992;147:883–887.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Schover L, Fouladi R, Warneke C, et al. Defining sexual outcomes after treatment for localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2002;95:1773–1785.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Eggener SE, et al. Potency, continence, and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol 2004;172:2227–2231.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Frazier HA, Robertson JE, Paulsen DF. Radical prostatectomy: the pros and cons of the perineal versus the retropubic approach. J Urol 1992;147: 888–990.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Weldon VE, Tavel FR. Potency sparing radical perineal prostatectomy: anatomy, surgical technique, and initial results. J Urol 1988;140: 559–562.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Weldon VE, Tavel FR. Potency and morbidity after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol 1997; 158:1470–1475.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ruiz-Deya G, Davis R, Srivstav SK, Wise AM, Thomas R. Outpatient radical prostatectomy; impact of standard perineal approach on patient outcome. J Urol 2001;166;581.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Harris M. Radical perineal prostatectomy: cost efficient, outcome, effective, minimally invasive prostate cancer management. Eur Urol 2003; 44:303–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lerner SE, Fleischmann J, Taub HC, et al. Combined laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection and modified belt radical perineal prostatectomy for localized prostatic adenocarcinoma. Urology 1994;43:493–498.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Abbou CC, Salmon L, Hozek A, et al. Laproscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology 2000;55:630–634.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laproscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol 2000;163:1643–1649.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Arai Y, Egawa S, Terachi T, et al. Morbidity of laproscopic radical prostatectomy: summary of early multi-institutional experience in Japan. Int J Urol 2000;10:430–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Laproscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris experience. J Urol 2000;163:418–422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Guillonneau B, Cathelineau X, Doublet JD, Baumert H, Vallancien G. Laproscopic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 550 procedures. Crict Rev Oncol Hematol 2002;43;123–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Anantasiadis A, Salomon L, Katz R, et al. Radical retropubic versus laproscopic prostatectomy: a prospective comparison of functional outcome. Urology 2003;62:292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Roumeguere T, Bollens R, Bossche MV, et al. Radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparison of oncological and functional results between open and laproscopic approaches. World J Urol 2003;20:360–366.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rozet F, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective evaluation of 600 cases. J Urol 2005; 174:908–911.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Teber D, Ming SL. Laparoscopic and robotic assisted prostatectomy: critical analysis of the results. Eur Urol 2006;49: 612–624.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hara I, Kawabata G, Miyake H, et al. Feasibility and usefulness of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Kobe University experience. Int J Urol 2002;11:635–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Curto F, Benijits AP, Barmoshe S, et al. Nerve sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: our technique. Eur Urol 2006;49:344–352.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Namiki S, Egawa S, Terachi T, et al. Changes in quality of life in first year after radical prostatectomy by retropubic, laparoscopic, and perineal approach: multi-institutional longitudinal study in Japan. Urology 2006;67:321.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002;168: 945–949.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, et al. Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow up. Eur Urol 2003;44:175–181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Menon M, Tewari A, Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy team. Robotic radical prostatectomy and the Vattikuti Urology Institute technique: an interim analysis of results and technical points. Urology 2003;61:15–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tewari A, Peabody JO, Fischer M, et al. An operative and anatomic study to help in nerve sparing during laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2003;299:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M, Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy team. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 2003;92:205–210.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal A, et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy with preservation of the prostatic fascia: a feasibility study. Urology 2005;66: 1261–1265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Menon M, Kaul S, Bhandari A, et al. Potency following robotic radical prostatectomy: a questionnaire based analysis of outcome after conventional nerve sparing and prostatic fascia sparing techniques. J Urol 2005;174:2291–2296.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kaul S, Savera A, Badani K, et al. Functional outcomes and oncological efficacy of Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy with veil of Aphrodite nerve sparing: an analysis of 154 consecutive patients. BJU Int 2006;97:467–472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Chien WG, Mikhail AA, Marcelo AO, et al. Modified clipless antegrade nerve preservation in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with validated sexual function evaluation. Urology 2005;66:419–423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ahlering TE, Eichel L, Skarecky D. Rapid communication: early potency outcomes with cauteryfree neurovascular bundle preservation with robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2005;19:715.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Joseph JV, Rosenbum RM, Erturk E, Patel HRH. Robotic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: an alternative approach. J Urol 2006;175:945–951.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Tewari A, Kaul S, Menon M. Robotic radical prostatectomy: a minimally invasive therapy for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2005;6:45–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zippe CD, Raina R, Thukral M, et al. Management of erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy. Curr Urol 2001;2:495–503.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Goldstein AM, Meehan JP, Zakhary R, et al. New observation on micro architecture of corpora cavernosa in man and possible relationship to mechanism of erection. Urology 1982;20:259–266.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Persson C, et al. Correlation of altered penile ultrastructure with clinical arterial evaluation. J Urol 1989;142:1462–1468.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Jevtich MJ, Khawand NY, Vidic B. Clinical significance of ultrastructural findings in the corpora cavernosa of normal and impotent men. J Urol 1990;143:289–293.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Luangkhot R, et al. Collagen alterations in the corpus cavernosum of men with sexual dysfunction. J Urol 1992;148:467–471.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Moreland RB, Traish A, McMillin MA, et al. PGE1 suppresses the induction of collagen synthesis by transforming growth factor-beta 1 in human corpus cavernosum smooth muscle. J Urol 1995; 153:826–834.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Daley JT, Brown ML, Watkins T, et al. Prostanoid production in rabbit corpus cavernosum: I. regulation by oxygen tension. J Urol 1996;155: 1482–1487.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Daley JT, Watkins MT, Brown ML, et al. Prostanoid production in rabbit corpus cavernosum. II. Inhibition by oxidative stress. J Urol 1996; 156:1169–1173.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Moreland RB. Is there a role of hypoxemia in penile fibrosis: a viewpoint presented to the Society for the Study of Impotence. Int J Impot Res 1998;10:113–120.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Leungwattanakij S, et al. Cavernous neurotomy causes hypoxia and fibrosis in rat corpus cavernosum. J Androl 2003;24:239–245.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. User HM, et al. Penile weight and cell subtype specific changes in a postradical prostatectomy model of erectile dysfunction. J Urol 2003;169: 1175–1179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Iacono F, et al. Histological alterations in cavernous tissue after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2005; 173:1673–1676.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Mulhall JP, et al. Erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy: hemodynamic profiles and their correlation with the recovery of erectile function. J Urol 2002;167:1371–1375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Montorsi F, Guazzoni G, Strambi LF, et al. Recovery of spontaneous erectile function after nervesparing radical retropubic prostatectomy with and without early intracavernous injections of alprostadil: results of a prospective, randomized trial. J Urol 1997;158:1408–1410.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Raina, R, et al. Early use of vacuum constriction device (VCD) following radical prostatectomy (RP) facilitates early sexual activity and potential return of erection. Int J Impot Res 2006;18:77–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Raina R, Agarwal A, Nandipati KC, Zippe CD. Interim analysis of the early use of MUSE following radical prostatectomy (RP) to facilitate early sexual activity and return of spontaneous erectile function. J Urol 2005;173(suppl): abstract 737.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Schwartz EJ, Wong P, Graydon RJ. Sildenafil preserves intracorporeal smooth muscle after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 2004;171:771–774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Padma-Nathan H, et al. Postoperative nightly administration of sildenafil citrate significantly improves the return of normal spontaneous erectile function after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003;169:375, abstract 1402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Gallo L, Perdona S, Autorino R, et al. Recovery of erection after pelvic urologic surgery: our experience. Int J Impot Res 2005;17:484.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Raina R, Lakin MM, Agarwal A, et al. Long-term intracavernosal therapy responders can potentially switch to sildenafil citrate after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2004;63:532.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Nandipati KC, et al. Early combination therapy following radical prostatectomy: intracorporeal alprostadil and sildenafil promotes early return of natural erections. Poster present at: 79th Annual Meeting of North Central Section AUA; 2005; Chicago, IL. Poster 72.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Nandipati K, Raina R, Agarwal A, Zippe CD. Early combination therapy: intracavernosal sildenafil following radical prostatectomy increases sexual activity and the return of natural erections. Int J Impot Res 2006;16:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A. Laproscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional and robotic. Urology 2005;66:101–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Potosky AL, Davis WW, Hoffman RM, et al. Five year outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96: 1358–1367.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Korfage IJ, Essink-Bot ML, Borsboom GJJM, et al. Five-year follow-up of health related quality of life after primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 2005;116:291–296.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Penson DF, McLerran D, Feng Z, et al. 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 2005;173:1701–1705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Nandipati K, Rupesh R, Agarwal A, Zippe CD. Five-year potency status after radical prostatectomy: role of oral therapy in erectaids. Presented at: American Urological Association Annual Meeting; 2005. San Francisco, CA: Abstract 270.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Stephenson RA, Mori M, Hsieh Y-C, et al. Treatment of erectile dysfunction following therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: patient reported use and outcomes from the surveillance, epidemiology and end results prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 2005;174:646–650.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Nandipati K, Rupesh R, Agarwal A, Zippe CD. Role of early sildenafil in preservation of erectile function following prostate brachytherapy. Presented at: North Central Section American Urology Association Annual Meeting; 2005. San Diego, CA: Abstract.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Glickman Urological Institute at Marymount Hospital, Cleveland Clinic, Garfield Heights, OH, USA

    Craig D. Zippe MD

  2. Glickman Urological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Garfield Heights, OH, USA

    Shikha Sharma MD

Authors
  1. Craig D. Zippe MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shikha Sharma MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Robotic and Computer-Assisted Surgery and for Robotic and Minimally Invasive Urologic Surgery, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA

    Vipul R. Patel MD (Director, Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery and Associate Professor of Bioinformatics) (Director, Associate Clinical Professor of Surgery and Associate Professor of Bioinformatics)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zippe, C.D., Sharma, S. (2007). Management of Postprostatectomy Erectile Dysfunction. In: Patel, V.R. (eds) Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-704-6_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-704-6_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-545-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-704-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation