Evaluation of the Nervous and Vascular Systems in Erectile Dysfunction Patients after Electric Injuries.
10.4111/kju.2006.47.7.769
- Author:
Jong Myung KIM
1
;
Hyung Joo KIM
;
Nak Gyeu CHOI
;
Cheong Hoon SEO
Author Information
1. Department of Urology and the Rehabilitation Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. urokhj@hanmail.net
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Nocturnal penile tumescence;
Bulbocavernosus reflex;
Duplex Doppler ultrasonography;
Erectile dysfunction;
Electric injuries
- MeSH:
Burns;
Electric Injuries*;
Erectile Dysfunction*;
Extremities;
Humans;
Male;
Penile Erection;
Prevalence;
Reflex;
Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2006;47(7):769-772
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: There is a high prevalence of erectile dysfunction (ED) after electric injuries, but our medical understanding of ED after electric injuries is scanty at best. Thus, the authors attempted to investigate nocturnal penile tumescence (NPT), bulbocavernosus reflex latency (BCRL) and penile duplex Doppler ultrasonography (PDDU) for the patients who suffer from ED after electric injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of the patients who visited our Burn Care Center between January 2005 and February 2006, ten male patients (aged 20 or older) who complaining of ED after electric injuries underwent NPT, BCRL and PDDU. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 38.1 years (age range: 25-54), and the numbers of patients exposed to whole body, upper-lower extremity and upper-upper extremity pathways of the electrical current were 1, 2 and 7, respectively. For the patient exposed to the whole body pathway, abnormal findings were observed on all the tests. For one patient who experienced two upper-lower extremity pathways, normal findings were seen on all the tests, while the other patient showed an abnormal NPT, an normal BCRL and an arteriogenic ED. Three of the patients who experienced the upper-upper extremity pathway showed normal findings on all the tests. The other two in the group showed an abnormal NPT, a normal BCRL and arteriogenic ED; the other one showed a normal vascular function, a abnormal NPT and no reaction to BCRL; the other one showed an abnormal NPT, a delayed BCRL and an arteriogenic ED. CONCLUSIONS: More abnormal findings were seen in NPT, BCRL and PDDU for the cases associated with upper-lower body or whole body electrical current pathways, as compared to patients whose electrical pathways were limited to the upper body.
