Urology
Volume 75, Issue 1 , Pages 112-116, January 2010

Longer Time to Peak Flow Predicts Better Arterial Flow Parameters on Penile Doppler Ultrasound

Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia

Received 11 March 2009; accepted 30 May 2009. published online 20 November 2009.

Objectives

To review the associations between measured variables in Penile Doppler ultrasound procedures. Penile Doppler ultrasound is useful in the evaluation of erectile dysfunction, but there is no uniform standard of performing the procedure. It is generally believed that a peak systolic velocity > 30 cm/s, minimal venous leak, and resistive index > 0.8 are essential for adequate erection. While the arterial parameters are well studied, data on the predictive value of time to peak flow are lacking.

Methods

Penile duplex Doppler ultrasounds performed for either erectile dysfunction or Peyronie's disease evaluation were reviewed. Clinical records, International Index of Erectile Function scores, and ultrasound variables were examined. “Fast” responders reached maximal peak systolic velocity (PSV) ≤ 10 minutes, whereas “slow” responders reached maximal PSV between 15 and 25 minutes.

Results

Of 146 total patients, 36 (25%) were fast responders and 110 (75%), slow responders. No preprocedural characteristics, including the Erectile Function domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function, predicted time to peak flow. Compared with the fast responders, slow responders had higher mean PSV (left: 33.9 ± 19.5 vs 25.0 ± 11.7 cm/s, P = .01; and right: 36.4 ± 21.3 vs 25.0 ± 13.3 cm/s, P = .002). There was also a higher percentage of patients with average PSV > 30 cm/s in slow responders (58% vs 36%, P = .02).

Conclusions

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between slow and fast responders. However, slow responders did seem to have significantly better arterial flow parameters, although penile dimensions, cavernosal artery diameter, Erectile Function domain scores, and subjective rigidity were similar.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0090-4295(09)02235-3

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.05.102

Refers to article:

  • Editorial Comment

    Ronald W. Lewis
    Urology January 2010 (Vol. 75, Issue 1, Pages 116-117)

  • Reply

    Chad W.M. Ritenour
    Urology January 2010 (Vol. 75, Issue 1, Page 117)

Urology
Volume 75, Issue 1 , Pages 112-116, January 2010