Common Therapeutic Strategies in the Management of Sexual Dysfunction and Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual dysfunction is a frequent complication of treated and untreated cardiovascular disease. In fact, approximately 30% of hypertensives have been found to suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED) resulting from arterial dysfunction. Recent evidence has suggested that ED may be an early indicator of subclinical cardiovascular disease. In women, the evidence is similar, but more limited, showing that in hypertensive patients there is an increased prevalence of sexual dysfunction involving decreased vaginal lubrication, decreased orgasm, and increased pain. Clouding the issue, however, is that some antihypertensive agents may induce sexual dysfunction in hypertensives with normal sexual function. In contrast to the chronic treatments used in hypertension, therapies for ED involve acute treatments (none currently approved for women) targeting vasodilation of penile arteries, resulting in erection. Common to the treatment of hypertension and ED is that the current therapies were not designed to target underlying disorders of local, neural, vascular, or endocrine origin. In fact, while blood pressure is lowered, and erectile responses are improved with the respective therapies, the causal abnormalities may progress thereby limiting the long-term effectiveness of the medication. Some antihypertensive agents have been shown to have additional effects beyond blood pressure reduction and their impact on sexual function is a key focus of this review. This review examines the current and future strategies for treatments of male and female sexual dysfunction and the potential for therapeutic modalities that go beyond the recovery of the responses by targeting the fundamental mechanisms common to both sexual dysfunction and cardiovascular disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".