Skip to main content
Log in

External vacuum devices: a clinical comparison with pharmacologic erections

  • Free Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of the present study was to compare the satisfaction rates obtained for vacuum constriction devices with those achieved using intracavernous pharmacologic injections in a group of patients afflicted with erectile dysfunction. The subjects were stratified into three groups: group 1 failed to achieve an adequate erection on pharmacologic injection, group 2 achieved satisfactory erection following pharmacologic injection, and group 3 was left untreated. All patients were given a vacuum constriction device. We assessed their satisfaction using a questionnaire. The data suggest high satisfaction rates in all three groups. Of particular interest was that over half of the patients who had successfully been treated with pharmacologic injections switched to the vacuum constriction device at the end of the study. The data indicate high levels of patient satisfaction with the vacuum constriction devices, even among subjects in whom prior alternative impotence therapy had been successful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Meinhardt W, Kropman RF, Lycklama a Nijeholt AAB, Zwartendijk J (1990) Skin necrosis caused by use of negative pressure device for erectile impotence. J Urol 144:983

    Google Scholar 

  2. Nadig Pw, Ware JC, Blumoff R (1986) Noninvasive device to produce and maintain an erection-like state. Urology 27:126–131

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sidi AA, Becher EF, Zhang G, Lewis JH (1990) Patient acceptance of and satisfaction with an external negative pressure device for impotence. J Urol 144:1154–1156

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sidi AA, Reddy PK, Chen KK (1988) Patient acceptance of and satisfaction with vasoactive intracavernous pharmacotherapy for impotence. J Urol 140:293–294

    Google Scholar 

  5. Turner LA, Althof SE, Levine SB, Tobias TR, Kursh ED, Bodner D, Resnick MI (1990) Treating erectile dysfunction with external vacuum devices: impact upon sexual, psychological and marital functioning. J Urol 144:79–82

    Google Scholar 

  6. Witherington R (1989) Vacuum constriction device for management of erectile impotence. J Urol 141:320–322

    Google Scholar 

  7. Witherington R (1987) External aids for treatment of impotence. J Urol Nursing 6:10–16

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gould, J.E., Switters, D.M., Broderick, G.A. et al. External vacuum devices: a clinical comparison with pharmacologic erections. World J Urol 10, 68–70 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00186095

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00186095

Keywords

Navigation