Skip to main content
Log in

Laboratory evaluation of the patient with erectile dysfunction

  • Published:
Endocrine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Erectile dysfunction (ED) as a clinical entity is a problem that more than 50% of men will face as they age, and it can adversely affect overall quality of life and impact sexual partners. Our understanding of the pathophysiology and the multiple risk factors that contribute to ED has led to successful treatments, both nonsurgical and surgical, over the past two decades. Now, more nonurologists and primary care providers are seeing patients for their initial evaluation. It is imperative that they approach the workup and evaluation in a logical and efficient manner. After a thorough history and physical examination, followed by a relevant and systematic laboratory evaluation, most cases can be effectively identified and medical treatment can be initiated. However, patients who continue to have erectile difficulties or fail initial oral treatment are candidates for specialized evaluation of vascular, neurogenic, and hormonal dysfunction, which can lead to more specific treatment or possible surgical management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carson, C. C. (2002). Rev. Urol. 4(Suppl. 3), S2-S7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carbone, D. J. and Seftel, A. D. (2002). Geriatrics 57(9), 18–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Johannes, C. B., Araujo, A. B., Feldman, H. A., Derby, C. A., Kleinman, K. P., and McKinlay, J. B. (2000). J. Urol. 163(2), 460–463.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chun, J. and Carson, C. C. (2001). Urol. Clin. North Am. 28, 249–258.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kirby, R. S. (1999). In: Textbook of erectile dysfunction. Carson, C. C., Kirby, R. S., and Goldstein, I. (eds.). ISIS Medical Publishers: Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fanfulla, F., et al. (2000). Sleep 23(6), 775–781.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Haffner, S. M. (2002). Int. J. Clin. Pract. (Suppl. 132), 31–37.

  8. Guay, A. T. and Nankin, H. R. (1998). Endocr. Pract. 4(4), 219–235.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Broderick, G. and Lue, T.F. (2002). In: Campbell’s urology. Walsh, P. C., Retik, A. B., Vaughan, E. D., and Wein, A. J. (eds.). Saunders: Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ellis, W. J. and Grayhack, J. T. (1963). J. Urol. 89, 895–899.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Feldman, H., Goldstein, I., and Hatzichristou, D. (1994). J. Urol. 151, 54–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Reiter, W. J., Pycha, A., and Schatzl, G. (2000). Urology 55, 755–758.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Buvat, J. and Lemaire, A. (1997). J. Urol. 158, 1764–1769.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Dey, J. and Shepherd, M. D. (2002). Maryo Clin. Proc. 77, 276–282.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lue, T. F., Hrcicak, H., Marich, K. W., and Tanagho, E. A. (1985). Semin. Urol. 3, 43–48.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sean P. McLaughlin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McLaughlin, S.P., Carsson, C.C. Laboratory evaluation of the patient with erectile dysfunction. Endocr 23, 113–117 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1385/ENDO:23:2-3:113

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/ENDO:23:2-3:113

Key Words

Navigation