Erectile Dysfunction Clinical Trial
— EROSOfficial title:
Epithesis Versus Prosthesis in Post-phalloplasty Transgender Patients.
Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals most often choose for phalloplasty as a means to create masculine external genitalia. The neophallus created in phalloplasty is usually insufficient for penetrative sexual intercourse due to the lack of erectile structures. Therefore, implantation of an internal erectile prosthesis or use of an external device or epithesis is required. Internal prostheses are the main method for attaining penile rigidity after phalloplasty, but they carry a high risk of complications. Previous research has shown that up to 22% of prostheses for cisgender men were explanted due to various reasons, including infection, erosion, and malfunction within 20 months. The lack of reliable and durable erectile devices leads to a large proportion of patients either choosing phalloplasty but never going for the placement of an erectile prosthesis or completely abandoning the idea of GGAS under the form of phalloplasty. Secondarily, TGD individuals may be concerned about complication rates and likely need for additional surgeries associated with penile implant surgery. Therefore, alternative options for transgender and gender non-conforming patients after phalloplasty are needed. These alternatives may be surgical or non-surgical. External penile epitheses or penile splints were originally designed for cisgender men with erectile dysfunction but have been used experimentally by post-phalloplasty transgender men. While there is no data on the usability and durability of penile epitheses in a TGD population, they may be a viable alternative to an internal penile prosthesis after phalloplasty. Penile lifters or splints, marketed as ElatorTM or ErektorTM, are commercially available and consist of two rigid rings connected by rigid metal rods. The biggest of two rings is placed around the base of the phallus, and the second ring is placed behind the coronal ridge. By connecting the rods to the ring at the base of the penis, tension and rigidity between the two rings is created, allowing the user to penetrate their partner and remove the device after intercourse. The current study aims to extend the knowledge on these external devices by comparing them to the implantation of an internal penile prosthesis in post-phalloplasty transgender patients.
Status | Recruiting |
Enrollment | 40 |
Est. completion date | December 31, 2024 |
Est. primary completion date | June 30, 2024 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | Accepts Healthy Volunteers |
Gender | Female |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Transgender or gender non-conforming individuals diagnosed according to the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria. - Patients have undergone phalloplasty as a form of genital gender affirming surgery. - = 1 year after phalloplasty (any type of flap combination is allowed), performed at the Ghent University Hospital or Amsterdam UMC. - = 3 months after coronaplasty and having reasonably pronounced coronal ridge, as defined by the surgeons' expert opinion (This criterion is only obligatory in the eptithesis group, not in the prosthesis group). - Anatomic penile length and girth as defined by the surgeons' expert opinion. - Absence of urethral stricture or other structural problem resulting in voiding dysfunction. - Normal uroflowmetry and post-void residue - Regain of at least minimal protective sensation up to the tip of the phallus as defined by Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing. - Established (primary) sexual relationship with partner who is willing to take part in the study. - Both patient and partner have interest in penetrative sexual intercourse. - Patient is unable to penetrate the partner (anal or vaginal) adequately sexually without the aid of supportive measures (condom, taping, penile sleeve, penile epithesis or any other measure defined as supportive by the investigators). - Fit and eligible for erection prosthesis surgery, based on the surgeons' expert opinion. - No history of erection prosthesis surgery. - No interest in or fear of prosthesis surgery making this option obsolete (This criterion is only obligatory in the eptithesis group, not in the prosthesis group) - Treatment naïve in the use of the Elatortm or Erektortm epithesis. - Voluntarily signed written informed consent according to the rules of Good Clinical Practice (Declaration of Helsinki) and national regulations. Exclusion Criteria: - Cisgender patients treated with phalloplasty various reasons. - Post-metoidioplasty patients (metoidioplasty as step-up to performed phalloplasty is allowed). - Absence of coronaplasty or coronaplasty performed < 3 months ago or coronaplasty did not leave sufficiently pronounced coronal ridge as defined by the surgeons' expert opinion (This criterion is only obligatory in the epithesis group, not in the prosthesis group) - Penile dimensions are not anatomic (e.g. too small or too large). - Underlying LUTDs requiring further investigation and/or treatment. - Inadequate protective sensation in the penis. - No established (sexual) partner and/or partner is not willing to take part in the study. - Patient and/or partner have no interest in penetrative sexual intercourse. |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Belgium | Department of Urology, University Hospital Ghent | Ghent | East-Flanders |
Netherlands | Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Center | Amsterdam | Noord-Holland |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University Hospital, Ghent | ELATOR/EREKTOR |
Belgium, Netherlands,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Percentage of patients choosing either for the prosthesis or the epithesis at the start of study | At baseline, patients will get information on both the prosthesis and the epithesis and will be free to choose between them. This difference in percentage and the reasons for choosing between either will be noted. | Baseline assessment | |
Primary | Difference in capability rate of vaginal and/or anal penetration of the participant's partner | Capability will be defined as full repetitive anal and/or vaginal penetration of the partner while using the epithesis or prosthesis, which was not possible before use or implantation, without pain to patient and/or partner, until the end of the intended sexual intercourse.
If penetration is not possible, the reasons for this incapacity will be noted |
Baseline questionnaire, followed by reassessment at 1 and 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Interest in continued use of epithesis by both patient and partner | Interest in continued use will be defined as the proportion of patients and their partners in the epithesis arm with interest in and willingness to continue use of the external penile epithesis after the study period. | Assessment at 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Difference in quality of sexual experience | Assessed using the Quality of Sexual Experience questionnaire (QSE). The QSE questionnaire provides a summative score between 7 and 49. A higher score indicates a better sexual experience. | Baseline questionnaire, followed by reassessment shortly after sexual activity. To be filled out by patient and partner at least once per month during the 4 months of the study period | |
Secondary | Difference in treatment satisfaction | Assessed using the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction questionnaire (EDITS).
The EDITS questionnaire provides two summative scores of 0-44 and 0-20 for patient and partner scores respectively. A higher score indicates a better treatment satisfaction. Higher scores indicate better outcome. |
Assessment at 1 and 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Difference in relationship satisfaction | Assessed using the Maudsley Marital Questionnaire (MMQ). The MMQ provides three summative scores of 0-80, 0-40 and 0-40 on relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and overall quality of life respectively. Lower scores indicate better outcome. | Baseline questionnaire, followed by reassessment at 1 and 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Difference in lower urinary tract symptoms | Assessed using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-MLUTS).
The ICIQ-MLUTS module, consisting of 7 questions, provides a summative score between 0 (asymptomatic) and 24 (most symptomatic) (question 1 - 6) and a bother score between 0 (not bothersome) and 3 (very bothersome) (question 7). |
Baseline questionnaire, followed by reassessment at 1 and 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Difference in maximum flow rate | Assessed using uroflometry (Qmax) | Baseline evaluation, followed by reassessment at 1 and 4 months after study start | |
Secondary | Postoperative complication rate | Categorized according to Clavien-Dindo classification system | Within 90 days postoperatively | |
Secondary | Overall complication rate | Categorized according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events classification system (CTCAE) | Continuously for duration of study period until 90 days after end of study period |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05366504 -
LiST Plus PRP Injection Therapy vs LiST Monotherapy for ED Treatment
|
Phase 2/Phase 3 | |
Recruiting |
NCT02745808 -
Injectable Collagen Scaffold™ Combined With HUC-MSCs for the Improvement of Erectile Function in Men With Diabetes
|
Phase 1 | |
Recruiting |
NCT02573805 -
the Diagnostic Value of Rigiscan Test (Nocturnal Penile Tumescence and Rigidity, NPTR) in Chinese Males
|
N/A | |
Withdrawn |
NCT02579148 -
Collagen Scaffolds Loaded With HUCMSCs for the Improvement of Erectile Function in Men With Diabetes
|
Phase 1 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT01967251 -
Efficacy, Safety and Dose-response of Udenafil in Patients With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and Erectile Dysfunction
|
Phase 2 | |
Recruiting |
NCT02225548 -
Sagene 2014 - Parkinson's Disease and Erectile Dysfunction
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT02587988 -
Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HCP1302
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT01937871 -
A Study of Tadalafil in Men With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) and Erectile Dysfunction (ED)
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT02945462 -
Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Erectile Dysfunction (ED)
|
Phase 1 | |
Completed |
NCT01698684 -
Research Evaluating a PDE5 Inhibitor for Erectile Dysfunction
|
Phase 4 | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT01321489 -
A Study to Evaluate a Possible Superiority Expressed by the Faster Onset of Action and the Efficacy and Safety of Sildenafil Citrate 20mg Sublingual Tablet in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction of Different Etiologies
|
Phase 3 | |
Terminated |
NCT01262833 -
Pudendal Assessment in Erectile Dysfunction
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02226237 -
Effectiveness of Physiotherapy to Treat the Urinary Incontinence and Erectile Dysfunction Post Retropubic Prostatectomy
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT01230541 -
Effect of Udenafil on Spermatogenesis
|
Phase 1 | |
Completed |
NCT01037218 -
Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction II
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT01037244 -
Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction I
|
Phase 3 | |
Recruiting |
NCT00313898 -
Effect of Sildenafil on Quality of Sexual Life in Mild to Normally Sexually Functioning Males
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00663728 -
Assessment of Duration of Erection With Vardenafil 10 mg
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00421083 -
Efficacy and Safety of Tadalafil in Subjects With Erectile Dysfunction Caused by Spinal Cord Injury
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT00667979 -
Evaluating the Efficacy of Vardenafil in Subjects With Erectile Dysfunction (ED) Administered 12, 18 or 24 Hours Prior to Intercourse
|
Phase 4 |