Status Plus

abstract

abstract

319

Penile vibratory stimulation in penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: a randomized, controlled trial

Clavell Hernandez, J1; Wu, Q2; Zhou, X3; Nguyen, JN3; Davis, JW4; Wang, R5

1: University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston and MD Anderson Cancer Center, USA; 2: University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston, USA; 3: University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston, TX USA; 4: MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX USA; 5: University of Texas McGovern Medical School at Houston and MD Anderson Cancer Center,

Objective: Penile vibratory stimulation (PVS) mimics rapid and repetitive manual/hand stimulation of the penis, which is a natural aspect of human sexual behavior. Vibratory stimulation of the genitalia is considered safe by the medical community with important benefits, such as treatment of orgasmic dysfunction, stress urinary incontinence, ejaculation, and erection. We propose that daily use of the Viberect PVS system for several minutes (7-10 minutes a day) shortly after radical prostatectomy (RP) by highly motivated patients may help in stimulation the spinal autonomic centers that give rise to the cavernous nerves.  To evaluate the efficacy of the Viberect PVS system as part of a penile rehabilitation protocol in patients undergoing nerve-sparing robotic-assisted RP..

Methods: Randomized prospective single center clinical trial designed to evaluate enhancement of recovery of erectile function and rigidity and urinary continence men between 40-70 years old with localized prostate cancer who have undergone nerve-sparing RP. The primary outcomes were erectile function score by using International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), erection hardness score (EHS > 4), and treatment satisfaction score (TSS).

Results: Data from 44 patients were included for analysis (31 in the PVS group and 13 in Control group). TSS score is significantly higher in the PVS group at 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery, but, although a trend was observed in the PVS group, the difference between groups did not reach significance with a median (range) score of 41 in the PVS group vs 30 in the control group at 12 months. There was no statistically significant difference in IIEF score, EHS score, or penile length between groups at all time points after surgery. Nevertheless, a higher trend in the IIEF score was observed in the PVS group in 6 weeks, 3, 9 and 12 months.

Conclusion: We present the preliminary results of an ongoing trial regarding use of the Viberect penile vibratory stimulation device during penile rehabilitation after RP. Patients using the Viberect device reported being more satisfied with their treatment than controls. Although differences in IIEF or EHS scores were not statistically significant, there was a trend towards higher erectile function in patients using the Viberect device.

Disclosure:

Work supported by industry: no.

Go Back