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:

Variability in penile duplex ultrasound international practice patterns, technique, and interpretation: an anonymous survey of ISSM members

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 30, pages 237–242 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Penile duplex ultrasound (PDU), combined with pharmacologic stimulation of erection, is the gold standard for the evaluation of multiple penile conditions. A 30-question electronic survey was distributed to members of the International Society for Sexual Medicine (ISSM). The survey assessed the variability in current PDU practice patterns, technique, and interpretation. Chi-square test was used to determine the association between categorical variables. Approximately 9.5% of all 1996 current ISSM members completed the survey. Almost 80% of members surveyed reported using PDU, with more North American practitioners utilizing PDU than their European counterparts (94% vs 69%, p < 0.01). Approximately 62% of PDU studies were performed by a urologist and more than 76% were interpreted by a urologist. Although almost 90% of practitioners reported using their own protocol, extreme variation in the technique existed among respondents. Over ten different pharmacologic mixtures were used to generate erections, and 17% of respondents did not repeat dosing for insufficient erection. Urologists personally performing PDU were more likely to assess the cavernosal artery flow using recommended techniques with the probe at the proximal penile shaft (73% vs 40%) and at a 60-degree angle or less (68% vs 36%) compared with non-urologists (p < 0.01). Large differences in PDU diagnostic thresholds were apparent. Only 38% of respondents defined arterial insufficiency with a peak systolic velocity < 25 cm/s, while 53% of respondents defined venous occlusive disease with an end diastolic velocity > 5 cm/s. This is the first study to assess the variability in the PDU protocol and practice patterns, and to pinpoint areas of improvement. As in other surveys, recall bias, generalizability, and response rate (9.5%) are inherent limitations to this study. Although most respondents report utilizing a standardized PDU protocol, widespread variation exists among practitioners in terms of both technique and interpretation, limiting accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment of penile conditions.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lue TF, Hricak H, Marich KW, Tanagho EA. Vasculogenic impotence evaluated by high-resolution ultrasonography and pulsed Doppler spectrum analysis. Radiology. 1985;155:777–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sikka SC, Hellstrom WJ, Brock G, Morales AM. Standardization of vascular assessment of erectile dysfunction: standard operating procedures for duplex ultrasound. J Sex Med. 2013;10:120–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rais-Bahrami S, Gilbert BR. Chapter 5: Penile ultrasound. In: Gilbert BR (Ed). Ultrasound of the male genitalia. (Springer, New York, 2015) pp 125-155; https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-1-4614-7744-0#about

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aversa A, Sarteschi LM. The role of penile color-duplex ultrasound for the evaluation of erectile dysfunction. J Sex Med. 2007;4:1437–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Quam JP, King BF, James EM, Lewis RW, Brakke DM, Ilstrup DM, et al. Duplex and color Doppler sonographic evaluation of vasculogenic impotence. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;153:1141–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schwartz AN, Lowe M, Berger RE, Wang KY, Mack LA, Richardson ML. Assessment of normal and abnormal erectile function: color Doppler flow sonography versus conventional techniques. Radiology. 1991;180:105–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Benson CB, Vickers MA. Sexual impotence caused by vascular disease: diagnosis with duplex sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;153:1149–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Broderick GA, Arger P. Duplex Doppler ultrasonography: noninvasive assessment of penile anatomy and function. Semin Roentgenol. 1993;28:43–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. American Institute of Ultrasound in M, American Urological A. AIUM practice guideline for the performance of an ultrasound examination in the practice of urology. J Ultrasound Med. 2012;31:133–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Berookhim BM. Doppler duplex ultrasonography of the penis. J Sex Med. 2016;13:726–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nehra A, Alterowitz R, Culkin DJ, Faraday MM, Hakim LS, Heidelbaugh JJ, et al. Peyronie’s disease: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2015;194:745–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Hatzimouratidis K, Giuliano F, Moncada I, Muneer A, Salonia A, Verze P, et al. EAU Guidelines on male sexual dysfunction: European association of urology; 2018; https://uroweb.org/guideline/male-sexual-dysfunction/

  13. Montague DK, Jarow JP, Broderick GA, Dmochowski RR, Heaton JP, Lue TF, et al. Chapter 1: the management of erectile dysfunction: an AUA update. J Urol. 2005;174:230–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. American Institute of Ultrasound in M, American Urological A. Training guidelines for physicians who evaluate and interpret urologic ultrasound examinations 2013; http://www.aium.org/officialStatements/53

  15. Mulhall JP, Jahoda AE, Cairney M, Goldstein B, Leitzes R, Woods J, et al. The causes of patient dropout from penile self-injection therapy for impotence. J Urol. 1999;162:1291–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Porst H. The rationale for prostaglandin E1 in erectile failure: a survey of worldwide experience. J Urol. 1996;155:802–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Prabhu V, Alukal JP, Laze J, Makarov DV, Lepor H. Long-term satisfaction and predictors of use of intracorporeal injections for post-prostatectomy erectile dysfunction. J Urol. 2013;189:238–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim SH, Paick JS, Lee SE, Choi BI, Yeon KM, Han MC. Doppler sonography of deep cavernosal artery of the penis: variation of peak systolic velocity according to sampling location. J Ultrasound Med. 1994;13:591–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Akkus E, Alici B, Ozkara H, Ataus S, Bagisgil M, Hattat H. Repetition of color Doppler ultrasonography: is it necessary? Int J Impot Res. 1998;10:51–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pagano MJ, Stahl PJ. Variation in penile hemodynamics by anatomic location of cavernosal artery imaging in penile duplex doppler ultrasound. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1911–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chiou RK, Pomeroy BD, Chen WS, Anderson JC, Wobig RK, Taylor RJ. Hemodynamic patterns of pharmacologically induced erection: evaluation by color Doppler sonography. J Urol. 1998;159:109–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Giuliano F, Bernabe J, Jardin A, Rousseau JP. Antierectile role of the sympathetic nervous system in rats. J Urol. 1993;150(2 Pt 1):519–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Francomano D, Donini LM, Lenzi A, Aversa A. Peripheral arterial tonometry to measure the effects of vardenafil on sympathetic tone in men with lifelong premature ejaculation. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:394934.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Aversa A, Rocchietti-March M, Caprio M, Giannini D, Isidori A, Fabbri A. Anxiety-induced failure in erectile response to intracorporeal prostaglandin-E1 in non-organic male impotence: a new diagnostic approach. Int J Androl. 1996;19:307–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wilkins CJ, Sriprasad S, Sidhu PS. Colour Doppler ultrasound of the penis. Clin Radiol. 2003;58:514–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. LeRoy TJ, Broderick GA. Doppler blood flow analysis of erectile function: who, when, and how. Urol Clin North Am. 2011;38:147–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Naroda T, Yamanaka M, Matsushita K, Kimura K, Kawanishi Y, Numata A, et al. [Clinical studies for venogenic impotence with color Doppler ultrasonography--evaluation of resistance index of the cavernous artery]. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 1996;87:1231–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Aversa A, Bonifacio V, Moretti C, Frajese G, Fabbri A. Re-dosing of prostaglandin-E1 versus prostaglandin-E1 plus phentolamine in male erectile dysfunction: a dynamic color power Doppler study. Int J Impot Res. 2000;12:33–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pathak RA, Rawal B, Li Z, Broderick GA. Novel evidence-based classification of cavernous venous occlusive disease. J Urol. 2016;196:1223–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hsiao W, Shrewsberry AB, Moses KA, Pham D, Ritenour CW. Longer time to peak flow predicts better arterial flow parameters on penile Doppler ultrasound. Urology. 2010;75:112–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Govier FE, Asase D, Hefty TR, McClure RD, Pritchett TR, Weissman RM. Timing of penile color flow duplex ultrasonography using a triple drug mixture. J Urol. 1995;153:1472–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Meuleman EJ, Bemelmans BL, van Asten WN, Doesburg WH, Skotnicki SH, Debruyne FM. Assessment of penile blood flow by duplex ultrasonography in 44 men with normal erectile potency in different phases of erection. J Urol. 1992;147:51–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by the Multidisciplinary K12 Urologic Research (KURe) Career Development Program awarded to Dolores J Lamb (NT is a K12 Scholar).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Mohit Butaney, Nannan Thirumavalavan, Mark S. Hockenberry, E. Will Kirby, Alexander W. Pastuszak & Larry I. Lipshultz

Authors
  1. Mohit Butaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nannan Thirumavalavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark S. Hockenberry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Will Kirby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alexander W. Pastuszak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Larry I. Lipshultz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohit Butaney.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Butaney, M., Thirumavalavan, N., Hockenberry, M.S. et al. Variability in penile duplex ultrasound international practice patterns, technique, and interpretation: an anonymous survey of ISSM members. Int J Impot Res 30, 237–242 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-018-0061-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-018-0061-3

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links