Effects of Surgical vs. Nonsurgical Therapy on Erectile Dysfunction and Quality of Life in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is associated with erectile dysfunction (ED). The improvement of ED after medical therapy including continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or mandibular advancement devices (MADs) is still controversial. Furthermore, the efficacy of surgical treatment has been little investigated. AIM: The aim of this nonrandomized prospective study was to evaluate the effects of surgical (uvulopalatopharyngoplasty [UPPP]) and nonsurgical approaches (CPAP and MAD) on ED and quality of life (QOL) in OSAS. METHODS: OSAS patients underwent UPPP (N = 30), CPAP (N = 16), or MAD (N = 10) and completed the Korean versions of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire (KIIEF-5) and the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI) before and after a median of 7 months of treatment (interquartile range, 4-15 months). All patients underwent a full-night in-laboratory polysomnography at baseline and follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measures are the KIIEF-5 and SAQLI scores. RESULTS: CPAP group showed older age, higher body mass index, and more severe OSAS than other groups. Apnea-hypopnea index and lowest oxygen saturation level improved significantly in all groups, but Epworth Sleepiness Scale score decreased significantly in UPPP and MAD groups. Significant increase of KIIEF-5 was observed in patients who underwent UPPP (P = 0.039, paired t-test), but not in nonsurgical treatment group. All groups had the tendency of better QOL after treatment, but statistical significance was found only in MAD group. Neck circumference (r = 0.360, P = 0.006) and KIIEF-5 score (r = -0.484, P < 0.001) at baseline were significantly related to the improvement of KIIEF-5. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that ED in OSAS may improve following UPPP. Better disease-specific QOL was observed after both surgical and nonsurgical therapies in OSAS. These findings suggest that interventions for OSAS can provide the alleviation of ED and increase QOL in OSAS patients with ED, especially if they had pronounced complaints of ED and wide neck circumferences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".