4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Princeton IV consensus guidelines: PDE5 inhibitors and cardiac health

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In 1999, 1 year after the approval of the first oral phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), the first Princeton Consensus Conference was held to address the clinical management of men with ED who also had cardiovascular disease. These issues were readdressed in the second and third conferences. In the 13 years since the last Princeton Consensus Conference, the experience with PDE5 inhibitors is more robust, and recent new data have emerged regarding not only safety and drug–drug interactions, but also a potential cardioprotective effect of these drugs.

          Aim

          In March 2023, an interdisciplinary group of scientists and practitioners met for the fourth Princeton Consensus Guidelines at the Huntington Medical Research Institutes in Pasadena, California, to readdress the cardiovascular workup of men presenting with ED as well as the approach to treatment of ED in men with known cardiovascular disease.

          Method

          A series of lectures from experts in the field followed by Delphi-type discussions were developed to reach consensus.

          Outcomes

          Consensus was reached regarding a number of issues related to erectile dysfunction and the interaction with cardiovascular health and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors.

          Results

          An algorithm based on recent recommendations of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association, including the use of computed tomography coronary artery calcium scoring, was integrated into the evaluation of men presenting with ED. Additionally, the issue of nitrate use was further considered in an algorithm regarding the treatment of ED patients with coronary artery disease. Other topics included the psychological effect of ED and the benefits of treating it; the mechanism of action of the PDE5 inhibitors; drug–drug interactions; optimizing use of a PDE5 inhibitors; rare adverse events; potential cardiovascular benefits observed in recent retrospective studies; adulteration of dietary supplements with PDE5 inhibitors; the pros and cons of over-the-counter PDE5 inhibitors; non–PDE5 inhibitor therapy for ED including restorative therapies such as stem cells, platelet-rich plasma, and shock therapy; other non–PDE5 inhibitor therapies, including injection therapy and penile prostheses; the issue of safety and effectiveness of PDE5 inhibitors in women; and recommendations for future studies in the field of sexual dysfunction and PDE5 inhibitor use were discussed.

          Clinical Implications

          Algorithms and tables were developed to help guide the clinician in dealing with the interaction of ED and cardiovascular risk and disease.

          Strengths and Limitations

          Strengths include the expertise of the participants and consensus recommendations. Limitations included that participants were from the United States only for this particular meeting.

          Conclusion

          The issue of the intersection between cardiovascular health and sexual health remains an important topic with new studies suggesting the cardiovascular safety of PDE5 inhibitors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references181

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Development and validation of QRISK3 risk prediction algorithms to estimate future risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study

            Objectives To develop and validate updated QRISK3 prediction algorithms to estimate the 10 year risk of cardiovascular disease in women and men accounting for potential new risk factors. Design Prospective open cohort study. Setting General practices in England providing data for the QResearch database. Participants 1309 QResearch general practices in England: 981 practices were used to develop the scores and a separate set of 328 practices were used to validate the scores. 7.89 million patients aged 25-84 years were in the derivation cohort and 2.67 million patients in the validation cohort. Patients were free of cardiovascular disease and not prescribed statins at baseline. Methods Cox proportional hazards models in the derivation cohort to derive separate risk equations in men and women for evaluation at 10 years. Risk factors considered included those already in QRISK2 (age, ethnicity, deprivation, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, total cholesterol: high density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio, smoking, family history of coronary heart disease in a first degree relative aged less than 60 years, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, treated hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease (stage 4 or 5)) and new risk factors (chronic kidney disease (stage 3, 4, or 5), a measure of systolic blood pressure variability (standard deviation of repeated measures), migraine, corticosteroids, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), atypical antipsychotics, severe mental illness, and HIV/AIDs). We also considered erectile dysfunction diagnosis or treatment in men. Measures of calibration and discrimination were determined in the validation cohort for men and women separately and for individual subgroups by age group, ethnicity, and baseline disease status. Main outcome measures Incident cardiovascular disease recorded on any of the following three linked data sources: general practice, mortality, or hospital admission records. Results 363 565 incident cases of cardiovascular disease were identified in the derivation cohort during follow-up arising from 50.8 million person years of observation. All new risk factors considered met the model inclusion criteria except for HIV/AIDS, which was not statistically significant. The models had good calibration and high levels of explained variation and discrimination. In women, the algorithm explained 59.6% of the variation in time to diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (R2, with higher values indicating more variation), and the D statistic was 2.48 and Harrell’s C statistic was 0.88 (both measures of discrimination, with higher values indicating better discrimination). The corresponding values for men were 54.8%, 2.26, and 0.86. Overall performance of the updated QRISK3 algorithms was similar to the QRISK2 algorithms. Conclusion Updated QRISK3 risk prediction models were developed and validated. The inclusion of additional clinical variables in QRISK3 (chronic kidney disease, a measure of systolic blood pressure variability (standard deviation of repeated measures), migraine, corticosteroids, SLE, atypical antipsychotics, severe mental illness, and erectile dysfunction) can help enable doctors to identify those at most risk of heart disease and stroke.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Heart disease and stroke statistics--2013 update: a report from the American Heart Association.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                The Journal of Sexual Medicine
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1743-6095
                1743-6109
                December 26 2023
                December 26 2023
                Article
                10.1093/jsxmed/qdad163
                06a0abd6-d49e-4825-ad8a-b62a8dcb5798
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article