Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Á¤»óÀΰú ô¼ö¼Õ»óȯÀÚ¿¡¼­ PGE1ÀÇ À½°æÇظéü³» ÁÖ»ç¿Í °æ¿äµµÀû ÁÖÀÔÀÇ È¿°úºñ±³ Comparison of Transurethral and Intracavernosal Administration of PGE1 in Normal Males and SCI Patients

´ëÇѺñ´¢±â°úÇÐȸÁö 1997³â 38±Ç 8È£ p.860 ~ 865
ÃÖÀçÈ£, ÃÖ¼º, ·ùÇö¿­,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÃÖÀçÈ£ (  ) 
°í½Å´ëÇб³ ÀÇÇкΠºñ´¢±â°úÇб³½Ç

ÃÖ¼º (  ) 
°í½Å´ëÇб³ ÀÇÇкΠºñ´¢±â°úÇб³½Ç
·ùÇö¿­ (  ) 
°í½Å´ëÇб³ ÀÇÇкΠºñ´¢±â°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

°á·Ð
PGEIÀÇ °æ¿äµµÀû ÁÖÀÔÀº À½°æº¹ÇÕÃÊÀ½ÆÄÃÔ¿µ¼ú·Î Æò°¡ÇÑ °á°ú À½°æÇظéü³» ÁÖ»ç¹ý°ú µ¿
ÀÏÇÏ°Ô À½°æÇظéüÀÇ Æò±Õ ¼öÃà±â Ç÷·ù¼ÓµµÀÇ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Áõ°¡°¡ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù. ¼º±³°¡´ÉÇÑ Á¤µµ
ÀÇ ¹ß±â´Â Á¤»ó±ºÀÇ 5·Ê (41.6%)¹× ô¼ö¼Õ»ó±ºÀÇ 5·Ê (55.5%)¿¡¼­ °¡´ÉÇÏ¿´´Ù. °æ¿äµµÀû ÁÖ
ÀÔÀÇ ºÎÀÛ¿ëÀ¸·Î¼­´Â 6·Ê (28.6%)¿¡¼­ ¿äµµÀÚ±ØÁõ»óÀÌ µ¿¹ÝµÈ µ¿ÅëÀ» È£¼ÒÇÏ¿´À¸³ª Àü½ÅÀû
ºÎÀÛ¿ëÀº ¹ß»ýµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù.
ÀÌ»óÀÇ °á°ú¿¡¼­ PGE1ÀÇ °æ¿äµµÀû Åõ¿©´Â ºñ·Ï À½°æÇظéü³» ÁÖ»ç¹ý¿¡ ºñÇØ °íºñ¿ëÀÌ°í
28.6%¿¡¼­ ¿äµµÀÚ±ØÁõ»óÀÌ µ¿¹ÝµÈ ÅëÁõÀ» È£¼ÒÇÏ¸ç ±× È¿°úµµ ¶³¾îÁö³ª ÇöÀúÇÑ ±âÁúÀû ¿ø
ÀÎÀÌ ¾ø°Å³ª ô¼ö¼Õ»óÀ¸·Î ÀÎÇÑ ½Å°æÀμº ¹ß±âºÎÀüȯÀÚÀÇ Áø´Ü ¹× Ä¡·á¿¡ À־ ¾ÈÀüÇÏ°í
°£ÆíÇÏ°Ô »ç¿ëµÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î ±â´ëµÈ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
Intracavernous self-injection therapy is now being widely used to treat patients with
erectile dysfunction. Many men with erectile dysfunction can achieve normal erection
with this therapy, but about 50% of men using this therapy eventually discontinue
treatment for reasons relating to penile pain, needle-phobia and side effects including
corporeal scarring, penile hematoma and priapism. Therefore, the less invasive route of
drug administration is highly recommended.
We investigated the efficacy and safety of transurethral instillation of PGE1 solution
for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in comparison with an intracavernous injection
of PGE1. Forty seven normal males and nine neurogenic impotent patients due to spinal
cord injury (SCI) were enrolled in this study and all subjects were evaluated with the
penile duplex color doppler ultrasonography before and after the drug administration.
Penile length and circumference were measured before and after the drug administration.
The erectile response was recorded on a five-point erection assessment scale by
Padma-Nathan. Of 12 normal males used transurethral instillation of PGE1 solution 5
(42%) were achieved erection allowing sexual intercourse (score 4 or 5). The mean peak
systolic velocity at 30 minutes was 75.82¡¾56.84§¯/sec, 63.11 ¡¾ 48.11§¯/sec and end
diastolic velocity at 30minutes was 3.49¡¾8.10§¯/sec, 10.51 ¡¾ 1.12§¯/sec and resistance
index was 0.96¡¾0.15, 0.78¡¾0.15 in normal males and SCI patients respectively. Mean
length and circumference of penile shaft before and after transurethral instillation of
PGE1 showed significant difference. Of 9 patients, 5 (55.5%) were achieved erection
allowing sexual intercourse. With the transurethral instillation of PGE1 solution, urethral
pain and burning sense were noticeable complication but systemic side effect was not
noticed.
In conclusion, transurethral PGE1 instillation can be satisfactorily used for the patients
with erectile dysfunction of less prominent organic and neurogenic origin, although the
effect of transurethral instillation of PGE1 is obviously less than that of intracavernosal
injection.

Å°¿öµå

Impotence; Transurethral instillation; PGE1;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

   

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS