Impotence in Diabetes: Aetiology, Implications for Treatment and Preferred Vacuum Device

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In an assessment of the contributions of autonomic neuropathy and vascular disease to the aetiology of male impotence in diabetes, evidence of autonomic neuropathy was identified in 23/39 (59%) individuals complaining of impotence. Thirteen of 26 men aged < 60 years tested with an intracorporeal injection of papaverine experienced little or no response and seven had tumescence but no rigidity. Radioisotope phallography demonstrated vascular disease in six of these seven, suggesting evidence of a vascular component in 19/26 (73%). Only one patient had non-organic impotence. Overall, evidence of vascular disease alone was demonstrated in 10/26 (38%), vascular disease plus autonomic neuropathy in 9/26 (35%), and autonomic neuropathy alone in 6/26 (23%). Many diabetic men complaining of impotence appear to have a significant vascular component which renders intracorporeal papaverine treatment ineffective. We compared the performance of a vacuum constriction-band (Erecaid) and condom-type (Synergist) device in 10 randomly selected men from this group. The devices, provided in random order for 5 months each, were assessed by questionnaire and interview of both the patient and partner. Two couples defaulted and another could use neither device. Although erectile capacity could be restored in the remainder, subsequent intercourse was only deemed satisfactory to both partners in five couples, who unanimously preferred the constriction-band device. In treatment with vacuum devices the constriction-band type seems to be the device of choice; the condom type should probably be reserved for those unable to use the constriction-band type.