Nerve-sparing vs. non-nerve-sparing open radical prostatectomy: correlations between International Index of Erectile Function and corpus cavernosum electromyography

Saša Vojinov; Dimitrije Jeremić; Ivan Levakov; Jovo  Bogdanović; Mladen Popov; Stevan Stojanović; Srdjan Govedarica

doi:10.2298/VSP250828077V

Saša Vojinov University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Dimitrije Jeremić University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Ivan Levakov University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Jovo Bogdanović University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Mladen Popov University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Stevan Stojanović University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Srdjan Govedarica University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia; †University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP250828077V

Keywords: electromyography;, erectile dysfunction;, penile erection;, prostatectomy;, prostatic neoplasms.

Abstract

Background/Aim. Erectile dysfunction (ED) increases with age, and the importance of sexual health has become more widespread in therapeutic practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between subjective and objective measures of ED in patients undergoing nerve-sparing vs. non-nerve-sparing open radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer. Methods. This prospective controlled study included 50 patients with diagnosed prostate cancer and normal preoperative erectile function (EF). Patients were divided into nerve-sparing (n = 25) and non-nerve-sparing (n = 25) groups. EF was assessed preoperatively and at six months using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire, while corpus cavernosum electromyography recorded spontaneous smooth muscle activity. Statistical analysis included paired t-tests and Spearman’s correlations. Results. Postoperative IIEF scores declined significantly in both groups (nerve-sparing: 22.04 ± 2.10 to 17.87 ± 3.83, p < 0.001; non-nerve-sparing: 21.67 ± 2.64 to 6.42 ± 1.51, p < 0.001). Bilateral nerve-sparing preserved superior EF compared to unilateral preservation (19.87 ± 2.80 vs. 14.13 ± 2.42, p < 0.001). No significant correlation was found between corpus cavernosum electromyography parameters (amplitude, mean wave, phase reversals) and IIEF scores (p > 0.05). Conclusion. Nerve-sparing open radical prostatectomy, particularly bilateral techniques, significantly reduces ED severity. However, corpus cavernosum electromyography did not correlate with patient-reported outcomes, suggesting its limited standalone utility in postoperative ED assessment.

References

Argiolas A, Argiolas FM, Argiolas G, Melis MR. Erectile dys-function: treatments, advances and new therapeutic strategies. Brain Sci 2023; 13(5): 802.

Terentes-Printzios D, Ioakeimidis N, Rokkas K, Vlachopoulos C. Interactions between erectile dysfunction, cardiovascular dis-ease and cardiovascular drugs. Nat Rev Cardiol 2022; 19(1): 59–74.

Li JZ, Maguire TA, Zou KH, Lee LJ, Donde SS, Taylor DG. Prevalence, comorbidities, and risk factors of erectile dysfunc-tion: Results from a prospective real-world study in the Unit-ed Kingdom. Int J Clin Pract 2022; 2022: 5229702.

MacDonald SM, Burnett AL. Physiology of erection and patho-physiology of erectile dysfunction. Urol Clin North Am 2021; 48(4): 513–25.

Allen MS, Wood AM, Sheffield D. The psychology of erectile dysfunction. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2023; 32(6): 487–93.

Pozzi E, Fallara G, Capogrosso P, Boeri L, Belladelli F, Corsini C, et al. Primary organic versus primary psychogenic erectile dys-function: findings from a real-life cross-sectional study. An-drology 2022; 10(7): 1302–9.

Elterman DS, Bhattacharyya SK, Mafilios M, Woodward E, Nitschelm K, Burnett AL. The quality of life and economic bur-den of erectile dysfunction. Res Rep Urol 2021; 13: 79–86.

Gandaglia G, Leni R, Bray F, Fleshner N, Freedland SJ, Kibel AS, et al. Epidemiology and prevention of prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol 2021; 4(6): 877–92.

Bergengren O, Pekala KR, Matsoukas K, Fainberg J, Mungovan SF, Bratt O, et al. 2022 update on prostate cancer epidemiology and risk factors—a systematic review. Eur Urol 2023; 84(2): 191–206.

Sekhoacha M, Riet K, Motloung P, Gumenku L, Adegoke A, Mashele S. Prostate cancer review: genetics, diagnosis, treat-ment options, and alternative approaches. Molecules 2022; 27(17): 5730.

Wasim S, Lee SY, Kim J. Complexities of prostate cancer. Int J Mol Sci 2022; 23(22): 14257.

Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, et al. Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate can-cer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT. Health Technol Assess 2020; 24(37): 1–176.

Vernooij RW, Lancee M, Cleves A, Dahm P, Bangma CH, Aben KK. Radical prostatectomy versus deferred treatment for lo-calised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 6(6): CD006590.

Jurys T, Burzynski B, Potyka A, Paradysz A. Post-Radical Pros-tatectomy Erectile Dysfunction Assessed Using the IIEF-5 Questionnaire---A Systematic Literature Review. Int J Sex Health 2022; 34(1): 55–64.

Vickers AJ, Tin AL, Singh K, Dunn RL, Mulhall J. Updating the international index of erectile function: evaluation of a large clinical data set. J Sex Med 2020; 17(1): 126–32.

Pikramenos K, Zachou M, Papadopoulos D, Papatsoris A, Varkarakis I, Mitsogiannis I. Post radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction. A single centre experience. Cureus 2023; 15(2): e34601.

Ju IE, Trieu D, Chang SB, Mungovan SF, Patel MI. Surgeon ex-perience and erectile function after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Sex Med Rev 2021; 9(4): 650–8.

Roaiah MMF, Abdel Kader AA, Hassanin AM, Maged M, Murshed MA. The application of spontaneous corpus caverno-sum EMG to assess the status of cavernous smooth muscles, a preliminary study. Rev Int Androl 2019; 17(1): 1–7.

Basiri A, de la Rosette JJ, Tabatabaei S, Woo HH, Laguna MP, Shemshaki H. Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and ro-botic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner? World J Urol 2018; 36(4): 609–21.

Yildiz A, Islamoglu E, Yuksel M, Erol I, Karamik K, Cakir T, et al. Assessment of changes in penile sensation by electrophysio-logical study after radical prostatectomy: a pilot study. Curr Urol 2021; 15(2): 111–4.

Kyriazis I, Spinos T, Tsaturyan A, Kallidonis P, Stolzenburg JU, Liatsikos E. Different nerve-sparing techniques during radical prostatectomy and their impact on functional outcomes. Can-cers (Basel) 2022; 14(7): 1601.

Kimura Y, Honda M, Teraoka S, Yumioka T, Iwamoto H, Morizane S, et al. Impact of penile rehabilitation with phosphodiester-ase-5 inhibitors on recovery of erectile function in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A propensity score-matched analysis. Int J Urol 2021; 28(6): 637–42.

Fode M, Ohl DA, Ralph D, Sønksen J. Penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: what the evidence really says. BJU Int 2013; 112(7): 998–1008.

Prabhu V, Sivarajan G, Taksler JL, Laze J, Lepor H. Long-term continence outcomes in men undergoing radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014; 65(1): 52–7.

Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of stud-ies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prosta-tectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62(3): 418–30.

Salonia A, Adaikan G, Buvat J, Carrier S, El-Meliegy A, Hatzi-mouratidis K, et al. Sexual rehabilitation after treatment for prostate cancer-part 2: recommendations from the Fourth In-ternational Consultation for Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2015). J Sex Med 2017; 14(3): 297–315.