Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy among urologist practitioners: how the opinion of urologists changed between 2016 and 2019

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 33, pages 839–843 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Over the past few years, an increase use of low-intensity shockwave therapy (LISWT) for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) has been observed. However, many controversies in the scientific literature about its efficacy still exist. We aimed to investigate changes in the pattern of usage and attitudes toward LISWT for ED among experts over the last years. A dedicated online survey was sent to delegates at the Congress for the EAU Section of Andrological Urology (ESAU) in Prague from 31st October to 1st November 2019. The survey captured demographic data, professional background, and the experience and personal knowledge about LISWT. The results were compared with a previous survey conducted in 2016 and investigating the same topics in order to assess changes in the knowledge and opinion on LISWT over time. Overall, 172 and 192 questionnaires were available from 2019 and 2016, respectively. Participants in the 2019 survey were 80 (45.7%) urologists, 52 (29.7%) uro-andrologists, and 34 (19.4%) residents in urology, from 30 different countries. Compared to the past, we observed an increase of respondents who were familiar with LISWT (75 vs. 95%; p < 0.0001) and who performed LISWT in their routine practice (38% in 2019 vs. 14% in 2016; p < 0.0001). Conversely, no changes in terms of overall perception of treatment efficacy were registered over time (68% in 2019 vs. 72% in 2016 considered LISWT as an effective treatment, respectively (p = 0.5)). An increased proportion of physicians had suggested a wider application of LISWT, and some even advocated its use in nonvasculogenic ED (33% in 2019 vs. 5.9% in 2016; p < 0.0001). The awareness and clinical application of LISWT for ED have increased over time, despite the lack of robust evidence in terms of effectiveness. Further research on the benefit of LISWT is needed to guide physicians in the therapeutic management of ED patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Russo GI, di Mauro M, Cocci A, Cacciamani G, Cimino S, Serefoglu EC, et al. Consulting “Dr Google” for sexual dysfunction: a contemporary worldwide trend analysis. Int J Impot Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0203-2.

  2. Towe M, El-Khatib F, Osman M, Huynh L, Carrion R, Ward S, et al. “Doc, if it were you, what would you do?”: a survey of Men’s Health specialists’ personal preferences regarding treatment modalities. Int J Impot Res. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0263-3.

  3. Fode M, Lowenstein L, Reisman Y. Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in sexual medicine: a questionnaire-based assessment of knowledge, clinical practice patterns, and attitudes in sexual medicine practitioners. Sex Med. 2017;5:e94–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fode M, Hatzichristodoulou G, Serefoglu EC, Verze P, Albersen M. Low-intensity shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction: is the evidence strong enough? Nat Rev Urol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2017.119.

  5. Capogrosso P, Frey A, Jensen CFS, Rastrelli G, Russo GI, Torremade J, et al. Low-intensity shock wave therapy in sexual medicine-clinical recommendations from the European Society of Sexual Medicine (ESSM). J Sex Med. 2019;16:1490–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim KS, Jeong HC, Choi SW, Choi YS, Cho HJ, Ha US, et al. Electromagnetic low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy in patients with erectile dysfunction: a sham-controlled, double-blind, randomized prospective study. World J Mens Health. 2020;38:236–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sramkova T, Motil I, Jarkovsky J, Sramkova K. Erectile dysfunction treatment using focused linear low-intensity extracorporeal shockwaves: single-blind, sham-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Urol Int. 2019;104:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yamaçake KGR, Carneiro F, Cury J, Lourenço R, Françolin PC, Piovesan AC, et al. Low-intensity shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction in kidney transplant recipients. A prospective, randomized, double blinded, sham-controlled study with evaluation by penile Doppler ultrasonography. Int J Impot Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-018-0062-2.

  9. Baccaglini W, Pazeto CL, Corrêa Barros EA, Timóteo F, Monteiro L, Saad Rached RY, et al. The role of the low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy on penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy: a randomized clinical trial. J Sex Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.024.

  10. Zewin TS, El-Assmy A, Harraz AM, Bazeed M, Shokeir AA, Sheir K, et al. Efficacy and safety of low-intensity shock wave therapy in penile rehabilitation post nerve-sparing radical cystoprostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urol Nephrol. 2018;50:2007–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Clavijo RI, Kohn TP, Kohn JR, Ramasamy R. Effects of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy on erectile dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2017;14:27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sokolakis I, Hatzichristodoulou G. Clinical studies on low intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Int J Impot Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0117-z.

  13. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, Corona G, Jones T, Kadioglu A, et al. EAU guidelines on sexual and reproductive health. Arnhem, The Netherlands: EAU Guidelines Office; 2020. http://uroweb.org/guidelines/compilations-of-all-guidelines/.

  14. Porst H, Burri A. Current strategies in the management of Peyronie’s disease (PD)—results of a survey of 401 sexual medicine experts across Europe. J Sex Med. 2019;16:901–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists (EAU-YAU) Men’s Health Working Group

Giorgio I. Russo2, Mikkel Fode4, Maarten Albersen10, Ahmet Urkmez11, Georgios Hatzichristodoulou12, Marco Falcone13, Melianthe Nicolai14, Murat Gul15, Selkuk Sarikaya16.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology and Andrology, Circolo & Macchi Foundation Hospital - ASST Sette Laghi, Varese, Italy

    Paolo Capogrosso, Federico Dehò & Paolo Capogrosso

  2. Urology Section, Department of Surgery, University of Catania, Catania, Italy

    Marina Di Mauro, Giorgio Ivan Russo & Giorgio I. Russo

  3. Department of Urology, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark

    Mikkel Fode

  4. Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Mikkel Fode & Mikkel Fode

  5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Technion School of Medicine, Haifa, Israel

    Lior Lowenstein

  6. Men’s Health Clinic, Amstelland Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Yacov Reisman

  7. University of Insubria, Varese, Italy

    Federico Dehò

  8. Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI; IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy

    Andrea Salonia

  9. University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy

    Andrea Salonia

  10. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Maarten Albersen

  11. Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences, Haydarpasa Numune Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ahmet Urkmez

  12. Department of Urology, Martha-Maria Hospital Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany

    Georgios Hatzichristodoulou

  13. Department of Urology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Marco Falcone

  14. Department of Urology, Haga Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Melianthe Nicolai

  15. Department of Urology, Selcuk University School of Medicine, Konya, Turkey

    Murat Gul

  16. Department of Urology, Gulhane Research and Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Selkuk Sarikaya

Authors
  1. Paolo Capogrosso
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marina Di Mauro
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mikkel Fode
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lior Lowenstein
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yacov Reisman
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Federico Dehò
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrea Salonia
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Giorgio Ivan Russo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists (EAU-YAU) Men’s Health Working Group

  • Giorgio I. Russo
  • , Paolo Capogrosso
  • , Mikkel Fode
  • , Maarten Albersen
  • , Ahmet Urkmez
  • , Georgios Hatzichristodoulou
  • , Marco Falcone
  • , Melianthe Nicolai
  • , Murat Gul
  •  & Selkuk Sarikaya

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paolo Capogrosso.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Members of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists (EAU-YAU) Men’s Health Working Group are listed above Conflict of interest.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Capogrosso, P., Di Mauro, M., Fode, M. et al. Low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy among urologist practitioners: how the opinion of urologists changed between 2016 and 2019. Int J Impot Res 33, 839–843 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-00347-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-00347-x

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links