Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geschlechtsverkehr nach radikaler nerverhaltender Prostatektomie

Diskrepanz zwischen Patient und Partnerin

Sexual intercourse following radical nerve-sparing prostatectomy

Discrepancies between patients and their female partners

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Ziel der Studie war es, die Häufigkeit des Geschlechtsverkehrs (GV) von Patienten nach beidseits nervschonender radikaler Prostatektomie und ihren Partnerinnen darzustellen.

Methode

Von Februar 2007 bis März 2008 wurden 25 Paare präoperativ, 6 und 12 Monate postoperativ zur tatsächlichen und gewünschten GV-Frequenz pro Monat und zur Zufriedenheit mit dem Sexualleben befragt.

Ergebnisse

Die Patienten gaben 6 und 12 Monate postoperativ höhere GV-Frequenzen an als ihre Partnerinnen (6 Monate: Mittelwert 4,9 vs. 4,2 und 12 Monate: Mittelwert 4,1 vs. 3,7). Die gewünschte GV-Frequenz lag zu diesen Zeitpunkten im Mittel bei den Patienten jeweils bei 7,4 und bei den Partnerinnen bei 5,5 und 5,1. Die Partnerinnen zeigten sich zufriedener mit dem Sexualleben als die Patienten (6 Monate: 71% vs. 56% und 12 Monate: 67% vs. 57%).

Schlussfolgerung

Patient und Partnerin scheinen ihr Sexualleben und den GV unterschiedlich zu bewerten. Es ist daher wichtig, die Ansichten beider Partner in Aufklärungsgesprächen zu berücksichtigen.

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the frequency of sexual intercourse (SI) in couples whose men had undergone nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy.

Method

From February 2007 to March 2008, 25 patients and their partners were asked preoperatively and 6 and 12 months postoperatively about their real and desired frequency of SI and about their satisfaction with their sex lives.

Results

When questioned 6 and 12 months postoperatively, patients reported higher frequencies of sexual intercourse than their female partners did (6 months: mean 4.9 vs 4.2 and 12 months: mean 4.1 vs 3.7). At both dates the frequency of SI desired by the men was on average 7.4 vs 5.5 and 5.1 by the female partners. The women appeared to be more satisfied with their sex lives than the patients (6 months: 71 vs 56% and 12 months: 67 vs 57%).

Conclusion

Patients and their partners differ in their appraisals of sex life and SI. Therefore it is important to consider perceptions of both partners in preoperation discussions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Ackermann R, Alberti W, Albrecht C et al (2009) Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie e.V., Düsseldorf

  2. Batzler WU BJ, Giersiepen K, Haberland J et al (2008) In: „Book“, Robert Koch-Institut (Hrsg) und die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e. V., Berlin, S 70–73

  3. Boehmer U, Babayan RK (2004) Facing erectile dysfunction due to prostate cancer treatment: perspectives of men and their partners. Cancer Invest 22:840–848

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Butler L, Downe-Wamboldt B, Marsh S et al (2000) Behind the scenes: partners‘ perceptions of quality of life post radical prostatectomy. Urol Nurs 20:254–258

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cayan S, Bozlu M, Canpolat B, Akbay E (2004) The assessment of sexual functions in women with male partners complaining of erectile dysfunction: does treatment of male sexual dysfunction improve female partner’s sexual functions? J Sex Marital Ther 30:333–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Colson MH, Lemaire A, Pinton P et al (2006) Sexual behaviors and mental perception, satisfaction and expectations of sex life in men and women in France. J Sex Med 3:121–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Crowe H, Costello AJ (2003) Prostate cancer: perspectives on quality of life and impact of treatment on patients and their partners. Urol Nurs 23:279–285

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Davidson PJ, Ouden D van den, Schroeder FH (1996) Radical prostatectomy: prospective assessment of mortality and morbidity. Eur Urol 29:168–173

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dubbelman YD, Dohle GR, Schroder FH (2006) Sexual function before and after radical retropubic prostatectomy: A systematic review of prognostic indicators for a successful outcome. Eur Urol 50:711–720

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Geary ES, Dendinger TE, Freiha FS, Stamey TA (1995) Nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a different view. J Urol 154:145–149

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Glickman L, Godoy G, Lepor H (2009) Changes in continence and erectile function between 2 and 4 years after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 181:731–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M et al (2008) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 53:68–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Eggener SE et al (2004) Potency, continence and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol 172:2227–2231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCammon KA, Kolm P, Main B, Schellhammer PF (1999) Comparative quality-of-life analysis after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation for localized prostate cancer. Urology 54:509–516

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Petry H, Berry DL, Spichiger E et al (2004) Responses and experiences after radical prostatectomy: perceptions of married couples in Switzerland. Int J Nurs Stud 41:507–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Quinlan DM, Epstein JI, Carter BS, Walsh PC (1991) Sexual function following radical prostatectomy: influence of preservation of neurovascular bundles. J Urol 145:998–1002

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rabbani F, Stapleton AM, Kattan MW et al (2000) Factors predicting recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 164:1929–1934

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosen R, Altwein J, Boyle P et al (2003) Lower urinary tract symptoms and male sexual dysfunction: the multinational survey of the aging male (MSAM-7). Eur Urol 44:637–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J et al (2000) The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther 26:191–208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Smith MD et al (1999) Development and evaluation of an abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 11:319–326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G et al (1997) The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 49:822–830

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosing D, Berberich HJ (2004) Disease- and treatment related sexual disorders after radical prostatectomy. A biopsychosocial consideration. Urologe A 43:291–295

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Santtila P, Wager I, Witting K et al (2008) Discrepancies between sexual desire and sexual activity: gender differences and associations with relationship satisfaction. J Sex Marital Ther 34:29–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schmitt DP, Alcalay L, Allik J et al (2003) Universal sex differences in the desire for sexual variety: tests from 52 nations, 6 continents, and 13 islands. J Pers Soc Psychol 85:85–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shindel A, Quayle S, Yan Y et al (2005) Sexual dysfunction in female partners of men who have undergone radical prostatectomy correlates with sexual dysfunction of the male partner. J Sex Med 2:833–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsujimura A, Matsumiya K, Miyagawa Y et al (2004) Relation between erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence after nerve-sparing and non-nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Urol Int 73:31–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tuncel A, Kirilmaz U, Nalcacioglu V et al (2008) The impact of transrectal prostate needle biopsy on sexuality in men and their female partners. Urology 71:1128–1131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Walsh PC, Marschke P, Ricker D, Burnett AL (2000) Patient-reported urinary continence and sexual function after anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 55:58–61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urologische Klinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaningerstraße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland

    C. Mücke, G. Hatzichristodoulou, J.E. Gschwend &  K. Herkommer MBA

Authors
  1. C. Mücke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Hatzichristodoulou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J.E. Gschwend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Herkommer MBA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Herkommer MBA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mücke, C., Hatzichristodoulou, G., Gschwend, J. et al. Geschlechtsverkehr nach radikaler nerverhaltender Prostatektomie. Urologe 50, 197–204 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-010-2468-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-010-2468-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation