Idiopathic recurrent ischemic priapism: a review of current literature and an algorithmic approach to evaluation and management

Abstract Background Stuttering priapism is characterized by recurrent, self-limited episodes of penile erection lasting from a few minutes to a maximum of three hours, often resolving spontaneously. These episodes can occur with or without sexual stimulation. If not treated promptly and effectively, stuttering priapism can severely impact a patient’s quality of life, leading to significant psychological distress and anxiety related to sexual performance. Although it has been associated with various hematological disorders and pharmacological treatments, many cases of stuttering priapism remain idiopathic, meaning they have no identifiable cause. Currently, no conclusive randomized clinical trials exist on the management of idiopathic stuttering priapism. This study aims to review the existing literature on the pathophysiology and management of idiopathic stuttering priapism and propose an algorithm to assist physicians in its evaluation and treatment. Results A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed database, focusing on the terms “idiopathic,” “stuttering,” “ischemic,” and “priapism.” The search identified 23 relevant references published between 1991 and 2022. The selection and analysis of these studies adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and results were described qualitatively. Recent research into the effectiveness, sustainability, tolerability, and side effects of various treatments for idiopathic stuttering priapism has enhanced the understanding of its underlying molecular mechanisms. Various treatments, targeting different mechanisms, have been identified that can potentially reduce the frequency and severity of episodes and improve patient outcomes. Conclusion Current research predominantly addresses the acute treatment of idiopathic stuttering priapism rather than strategies to alter the disease’s overall course. The limited number of treatment reviews, case reports, and the low level of evidence available, combined with the absence of randomized clinical trials, prevent the establishment of a consensus on treatment protocols. As a result, idiopathic stuttering priapism remains under-recognized and under-treated. This review proposes a management framework to help clinicians access and apply the available literature effectively, minimizing the reliance on extensive case reports and review articles

Educational tool-kit on diet and exercise : survey of prostate cancer patients about to receive androgen deprivation therapy.

To test a tool-kit designed to improve well-being in patients with prostate cancer. Lifestyle changes might lessen the metabolic, cardiovascular, and osseous side effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer patients

Is an Extended 20-Core Prostate Biopsy Protocol More Efficient than the Standard 12-Core? A Randomized Multicenter Trial

International audiencePurposeWe determined the impact of increasing the number of cores from 12 to 20 at initial prostate biopsy in men suspicious of prostate cancer.Materials and MethodsFrom December 2009 to November 2011, patients in 7 centers scheduled for a first prostate biopsy, with a prostate specific antigen less than 20 ng/ml and no nodule on digital rectal examination, were invited to participate in this superiority trial. Patients were randomized to a 12-core (PB12 group) or a 20-core (PB20 group) protocol. The primary end point was cancer detection rate. Secondary end points were cancer characteristics, rate of complications and patient tolerance assessed by a self-completed booklet before prostate biopsy and at day 5 and day 15.ResultsA total of 339 patients were randomized. Preoperative variables were similar in both groups. Cancer was detected in 71 patients (42.0%) in PB12 group and in 81 patients (48.8%) in PB20 group, and the difference was not significant (p >0.2). Gleason score and cancer length measured on prostate biopsy cores were not significantly different between groups. Although the cancer detection rate was linked to prostate volume, this was not affected by the number of extracted cores (p >0.4). Complications number and seriousness were comparable in both arms. No significant difference was noted regarding side effects and tolerance as self-assessed by the patient at day 5 and day 15 after prostate biopsy.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that there is no significant advantage in using a 20-core biopsy protocol vs 12-core protocol during an initial prostate biopsy