Inibidores da fosfodiesterase 5 para reabilitação da função erétil em pacientes submetidos à prostatectomia radical preservadora de nervo cavernoso: revisão de escopo
Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors for erectile function rehabilitation in patients undergoing nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a scoping review
Gabriel Carvalho Andrade Gadelha; Arlindo Monteiro de Carvalho Júnior
Resumo
Introdução: O objetivo deste estudo foi realizar uma revisão de escopo sobre a eficácia dos inibidores da fosfodiesterase-5 (PDE-5Is) na reabilitação da função erétil em pacientes submetidos à prostatectomia radical preservadora de nervos cavernosos (PRPN).
Métodos: As bases de dados utilizadas foram MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS e Web of Science. Foram incluídas revisões sistemáticas com meta-análise sobre o tema, até 5 de Março de 2024, sem restrição de idioma. Foram excluídas publicações que não abordassem alguma das relações citadas. Os dados foram organizados em tabelas para realização de análise descritiva. A qualidade metodológica dos estudos incluídos foi avaliado por meio da ferramenta ROBIS.
Resultados: Foram selecionados 8 estudos e todos concluíram que o uso dos PDE-5Is é eficaz na reabilitação peniana. Apenas uma das revisões verificou que o uso por mais de seis meses foi superior ao curto prazo e, outra concluiu que o uso de forma diária foi superior em relação ao uso sob demanda. Além disso, os artigos identificaram mais efeitos adversos no grupo experimental em relação ao grupo controle, mas sem comprometer a adesão terapêutica. Seis dos estudos foram classificados como baixo risco de viés, enquanto os outros dois tiveram risco incerto.
Conclusão: Os PDE-5Is são eficazes na recuperação da função erétil em pacientes submetidos à PRPN, sobretudo quando utilizados de forma regular e a longo prazo, cujo seguimento não é prejudicado pelos efeitos adversos. No entanto, devido à escassez de dados, novos estudos devem ser realizados para determinar a melhor forma de utilização dessas medicações.
Palavras-chave
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review on the efficacy of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE-5Is) in rehabilitating erectile function in patients undergoing cavernous nerve sparing radical prostatectomy (NSRP).
Methods: The databases used were MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS and Web of Science. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses on the subject were included until March 5, 2024, with no language restrictions. Publications that did not address any of the aforementioned relationships were excluded. The data was organized into tables for descriptive analysis. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the ROBIS tool.
Results: Eight studies were selected and all concluded that the use of PDE-5Is is effective in penile rehabilitation. Only one of the reviews found that use for more than six months was superior to short-term use, and another concluded that daily use was superior to on-demand use. In addition, the articles identified more adverse effects in the experimental group compared to the control group, but without compromising therapeutic adherence. Six of the studies were classified as low risk of bias, while the other two had uncertain risk.
Conclusion: PDE-5Is are effective in restoring erectile function in patients undergoing NSRP, especially when used regularly and over the long term, and follow-up is not hampered by adverse effects. However, due to the scarcity of data, new studies should be carried out to determine the best form of use of these drugs.
Keywords
Referências
1 Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-49. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660.
2 Sekhoacha M, Riet K, Motloung P, Gumenku L, Adegoke A, Mashele S. Prostate cancer review: genetics, diagnosis, treatment options, and alternative approaches. Molecules. 2022;27(17):5730. doi: 10.3390/molecules27175730.
3 Moretti TBC, Magna LA, Reis LO. Surgical results and complications for open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a reverse systematic review. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2022;44:150-161. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.08.015.
4 Kaba M, Binbay M, Erbin A, Tefekli AH, Verep S, Muslumanoglu AY. Evaluating the oncological and functional outcomes in 167 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: could laparoscopy still be a viable option in suitable patients? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2024;34(1):19-24. doi: 10.1089/lap.2023.0337.
5 Gandaglia G, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz PI, Sun M. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer. Future Oncol. 2015;11(20):2767-73. doi: 10.2217/fon.15.169.
6 Alivizatos G, Skolarikos A. Incontinence and erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy: a review. ScientificWorldJournal. 2005;5:747-58. doi: 10.1100/tsw.2005.94.
7 Hu SW, Wang YH, Huang JS, Yang YM, Wu CC, Cheng CW. The PDE5 inhibitor, vardenafil, ameliorates progressive pathological changes in a focal segmental glomerulosclerosis mouse model. Life Sci. 2022;309:120992. doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2022.120992.
8 Li J, Shi Q, Pu C, Tang Y, Bai Y, Yuan H, et al. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors for the treatment of post-nerve sparing radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction in men. Sci Rep. 2014;4:5801. doi: 10.1038/srep05801.
9 Haga N, Miyazaki T, Tsubouchi K, Okabe Y, Shibayama K, Emoto D, et al. Comprehensive approach for preserving cavernous nerves and erectile function after radical prostatectomy in the era of robotic surgery. Int J Urol. 2021;28(4):360-8. doi: 10.1111/iju.14491.
10 Capogrosso P, Vertosick EA, Benfante NE, Eastham JA, Scardino PJ, Vickers AJ, et al. Are we improving erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy? Analysis of patients treated over the last decade. Eur Urol. 2019;75(2):221-8. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.039.
11 Sari Motlagh R, Abufaraj M, Yang L, Mori K, Pradere B, Laukhtina E, et al. Penile rehabilitation strategy after nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Urol. 2021;205(4):1018-30. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001584.
12 Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467-73. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850.
13 Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Porritt K, Pilla B, Jordan Z, editors. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI; 2024. doi: 10.46658/JBIMES-24-09.
14 Covidence: Better systematic review management [Internet]. Level 10, 446 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia; 2014 [cited 2024 Mar 5]. Available from:
15 Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B, et al. ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005.
16 Perry R, Whitmarsh A, Leach V, Davies P. A comparison of two assessment tools used in overviews of systematic reviews: ROBIS versus AMSTAR-2. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):273. doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01819-x.
17 Cui Y, Liu X, Shi L, Gao Z. Efficacy and safety of phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors in treating erectile dysfunction after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Andrologia. 2016;48(1):20-8. doi: 10.1111/and.12405.
18 Goh HJ, Sung JM, Lee KH, Jo JK, Kim KN. Efficacy of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors in patients with erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transl Androl Urol. 2022;11(2):124-38. doi: 10.21037/tau-21-881.
19 Yang J, Jian ZY, Wang J. Phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors for erectile dysfunction following nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a network meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(8):e23778. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023778.
20 Tian D, Wang XY, Zong HT, Zhang Y. Efficacy and safety of short- and long-term, regular and on-demand regimens of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors in treating erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Interv Aging. 2017;12:405-12. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S122273.
21 Limoncin E, Gravina GL, Corona G, Maggi M, Ciocca G, Lenzi A, et al. Erectile function recovery in men treated with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor administration after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of placebo-controlled randomized trials with trial sequential analysis. Andrology. 2017;5(5):863-72. doi: 10.1111/andr.12403.
22 Qiu S, Tang Z, Deng L, Liu L, Han P, Yang L, et al. Comparisons of regular and on-demand regimen of PED5-Is in the treatment of ED after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer. Sci Rep. 2016;6:32853. doi: 10.1038/srep32853.
23 Wang X, Wang X, Liu T, He Q, Wang Y, Zhang X. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors for treatment of erectile dysfunction following bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e91327. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091327.
Submetido em:
04/04/2024
Aceito em:
09/09/2024
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email