Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 12, 2026
04:22
Treatment Model for Young Patients with Psychogenic Erectile Dysfunction and Resultant Infertility
Published on: May 30, 2025
778
An evidence-based perspective to commonly performed erectile dysfunction investigations
Hussein Ghanem1, Rany Shamloul
1Cairo University-Andrology, Sexology & STDs, Cairo, Egypt.
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
|December 19, 2007
Summary
Diagnosing erectile dysfunction (ED) lacks a gold standard. Evidence-based medicine principles, like likelihood ratios, are not fully applied to common ED diagnostic tests, limiting their clinical utility.
Area of Science:
- Sexual Medicine
- Urology
- Evidence-Based Medicine
Background:
- No universal gold standard exists for differentiating psychogenic from physical erectile dysfunction (ED).
- Current diagnosis relies on history, physical examination, and specialized tests.
- Sexual health specialists aim to determine the primary cause of ED.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review the status of evidence-based principles in diagnosing ED.
- To evaluate commonly used ED diagnostic tests from an evidence-based perspective.
Main Methods:
- Review of evidence-based medicine (EBM) concepts for diagnostic tests.
- Analysis of penile duplex, pharmacoarteriography, pharmacocavernosometry/cavernosography (PHCAS/PHCAG), and nocturnal penile tumescence (NPT) monitoring for ED.
Main Results:
- Several diagnostic tests are valuable for ED evaluation.
- Modern EBM concepts, such as likelihood ratios, are underutilized for these tests.
- Penile duplex shows good evidence for arteriogenic ED but lacks data for venous occlusion dysfunction.
Conclusions:
- Penile duplex is effective for arteriogenic ED but not venous dysfunction.
- PHCAS/PHCAG has limitations including unknown positive predictive value and potential false positives.
- NPT monitoring is advantageous for differentiating psychogenic from organic ED, but its mechanisms require further research.
