PD26-09 PRACTICE PATTERNS IN REHABILITATION OF ERECTILE FUNCTION FOLLOWING NERVE-SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: RESULTS FROM A GERMAN MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023PD26-09 PRACTICE PATTERNS IN REHABILITATION OF ERECTILE FUNCTION FOLLOWING NERVE-SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: RESULTS FROM A GERMAN MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Andreas Bannowsky, Daniar Osmonov, Sabine Bannowsky, and Stefan Ückert Andreas BannowskyAndreas Bannowsky More articles by this author , Daniar OsmonovDaniar Osmonov More articles by this author , Sabine BannowskySabine Bannowsky More articles by this author , and Stefan ÜckertStefan Ückert More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003304.09AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Despite objective data regarding rehabilitation of erectile function (EF) after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (nsRP) the ″gold-standard″-treatment is still under debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution of the different treatment options in Germany. METHODS: We performed a questionnaire sent to all urologist (outpatient/general and university hospitals/rehabilitation hospitals) in Germany. The survey consists of different questions, e.g. if and what kind of therapy the urologist choose to support rehabilitation of EF after nsRP. Further questions dealt with the frequency, duration and ″optimal″ start of the chosen therapy. RESULTS: Until today 262 urologists completed and returned the questionnaire. The distribution was: urologists in hospitals n=110, outpatient/ambulatory n=148, with 24% performing surgical treatment, and urologist in rehabilitation hospitals n=4. Overall 50% of the urologists are performing radical prostatectomy on a regular basis. The question about the ″rehabilitation concept″ showed 39 different treatments within this group. To increase EF after nsRP PDE5-inhibitors were mostly administered (88%): 45% ″on demand″ vs. 55% on a daily or regular basis ≥3 times/week. The use of penile injection therapy, MUSE or VCD was 32%, 6% and 30% respectively. In 56% the treatment started within the first weeks after surgery and was performed until the patient regained potency in 46%. Only 14% of the urologists didn′t choose any ″active″ kind of rehabilitation treatment for EF recovery after nsRP. CONCLUSIONS: Lots of different therapeutic concepts are currently performed in Germany to increase EF recovery after nsRP. The use of PDE5-inhibitors is the most chosen treatment option. Despite the published data regarding effectiveness the optimal treatment seems to be still unknown. Source of Funding: none © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e738 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Andreas Bannowsky More articles by this author Daniar Osmonov More articles by this author Sabine Bannowsky More articles by this author Stefan Ückert More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...