https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2025.13639
Recovery of functional outcomes after robot assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of vacuum therapy compared to PDE5 inhibitors alone
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 26 May 2025
Objective: This study evaluated the primary efficacy of vacuum therapy combined with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) vs. PDE5i alone in improving erectile function recovery, assessed via the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire, after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). A secondary objective was to assess the impact of the combined therapy on continence outcomes, including pad usage and continence scores. The study also explored predictors of rehabilitation success and the potential synergistic effects of the combined approach.
Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis of 101 patients who underwent RARP (2021-2023) was conducted. Patients were divided into Group 1 (PDE5i only, n=70) and Group 2 (PDE5i + vacuum therapy, n=31). Vacuum therapy was started within 20 days postoperatively and performed daily under specialist supervision. All data were completely anonymous. Primary outcomes included IIEF-5 scores for erectile function and continence recovery (pad usage, continence scores based on three levels: 0 - complete incontinence, 1 - stress incontinence and 2 - full continence). Predictive factors were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA and multivariate regression.
Results: Group 2 showed significantly higher mean IIEF-5 scores at 12 months (10.2 vs. 2.5, p<0.001) and earlier continence recovery, with better scores at 3 and 6 months (p < 0.05). Vacuum therapy and PDE5i accelerate continence recovery during the early postoperative period, with fewer pads required, compared with patients treated with PDE5i alone, at 6 months (1.32 vs. 1.62; p=0.358) and 9 months (0.54 vs. 1.08; p=0.034). Key predictors of recovery included age, BMI, nervesparing status, and preoperative continence levels.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates the benefits of combining vacuum therapy with PDE5i for improving erectile function and early continence recovery after RARP, highlighting the importance of early, individualized rehabilitation. Vacuum therapy enhances oxygenation, reduces fibrosis and complements PDE5i effects. Further research is needed to refine predictive factors for success and explore the impact of intraoperative blood loss on erectile recovery, enabling optimized, tailored strategies for post-RARP rehabilitation.
Downloads
Grossi FS, Utano E, Minafra P, et al. Oncological and functional outcomes of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: An 18-years, single-center experience. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2021;93:3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.3.268
Salciccia S, Rosati D, Viscuso P, et al. Influence of operative time and blood loss on surgical margins and functional outcomes for laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective analysis. Cent European J Urol. 2021; 74:503-515
Quin F, Wang S, Li J, et al. The early use of vacuum therapy for penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Mens Health 2018; 12:2136-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988318797409
Yuan J., Lin H, Li P, et al. molecular mechanisms of vacuum therapy in penile rehabilitation: a novel animal study. Eur Urol 2010; 58:773-780. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.07.005
Kohler TS, Pedro R, Hendlin K, et al. A pilot study on the early use of the vacuum erection device after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2007;100:858-862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07161.x
Soderdahi DW, Thrasher JB, Hansberry K. Intracavernosal drug-induced erection therapy versus external vacuum devices in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. BJU 1997;79:952-957. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410X.1997.00147.x
Patel HR, Ilo D, Shah N, et al. Effects of tadalafil treatment after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: quality of life, psychosocial outcomes, and treatment satisfaction results from a randomized, placebo-controlled phase IV study. BMC Urology 2015;15:31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-015-0022-9
Djavan B, Agalliu I, Laze J, et al. Blood loss during radical prostatectomy: impact on clinical, oncological and functional outcomes and complication rates. BJU Int. 2012; 110:69-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10812.x
Lin H, Wang R. The science of vacuum erectile device in penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy. Transl Androl Urol 2013;2:61-66.
Du Y, Long Q, Guan B, et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is more beneficial for prostate cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Sci Monit. 2018;24:272-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.907092
Preisser F, Pompe RS, Salomon G, et al. Impact of the estimated blood loss during radical prostatectomy on functional outcomes. Urol Oncol. 2019; 37:298.e11-298.e17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.01.006
Schoentgen N, Califano G, Manfredi C, et al. Is it worth starting sexual rehabilitation before radical prostatectomy? Results from a systematic review of the literature. Front Surg. 2021;8:648345. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.648345
Lane JA, Donovan JL, Young GJ, et al. Functional and quality of life outcomes of localised prostate cancer treatments (ProstateTesting for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) study) BJU Int 2022;130: 370-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15739
Nicolai M, Urkmez A, Sarikaya S, et al. Penile rehabilitation and treatment options for erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy: a systematic review. Front. Surg. 2021;8:636974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.636974
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.