Comparative Analysis of Tunical Plication vs. Intralesional Injection Therapy for Ventral Peyronie's Disease.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
Approximately 10% of Peyronie's disease (PD) patients present with ventral curvatures and, as such, there is a paucity of data describing the optimal approach for treatment.
AIM: This study aims to compare the outcomes of surgery (tunical plication [TP]) and intralesional injection (ILI) therapy (interferon-α2b) in men with ventral PD.
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
Retrospective data were collected from two centers: Tulane University (ILI) and Technical University of Munich (TP). Collected variables included patient demographics, pre- and post-treatment sexual function, rigorous penile measurements (curvature, length, and penile vascular findings), and post-treatment outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 35 patients with ventral PD (21 ILI and 14 TP) were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two groups prior to the interventions. There was a significantly better improvement in mean curvature with TP (46.4 degrees) as compared with ILI (9.3), P < 0.0001. TP was also associated with a significantly higher rate of ≥20% improvement in curvature as compared with ILI (100% vs. 67%, P = 0.027). Although there was no significant difference in post-treatment change in Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) scores between the groups, 36% of the ILI patients noted an improved SHIM score as compared with none in the TP group. Erect penile length was preserved or improved in 67% of the ILI group vs. 14% of the TP group, P = 0.005.
CONCLUSIONS
TP confers a better overall improvement in penile curvature as compared with ILI in patients with ventral PD. Preserved or improved erect penile length and SHIM scores may be observed in patients undergoing ILI. 12:2492-2498.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.