Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting 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.

Discordant erectile function assessment between validated questionnaire scores and penile Doppler ultrasound in Peyronie’s disease


Peyronie’s disease results in curvature of the penis which may cause difficulty with penetrative intercourse. The diagnosis of Peyronie’s disease is easily obtained through history and physical examination alone, but the severity of erectile dysfunction relies on patient history and use of validated questionnaires. However, erectile dysfunction questionnaires were not validated in the Peyronie’s disease population and may not be a reliable assessment. Penile Doppler ultrasound is a noninvasive tool that assesses vascular function. We hypothesized that penile Doppler ultrasound will be discordant with International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) results in men with Peyronie’s disease and erectile dysfunction. In this cross-sectional study, we reviewed a prospectively collected database of men with Peyronie’s disease. In total, 108 men had questionnaire and ultrasound data. Of them, 87 had erectile dysfunction based on IIEF-EF or IIEF-5 (SHIM). However, 48 (55%) of those men had normal vascular parameters. Interestingly, among a subgroup of 33 men with severe erectile dysfunction on IIEF-EF or IIEF-5, 20 (61%) had normal vascular parameters. Our study demonstrates significant discordance between questionnaires and penile Doppler ultrasound. Therefore, ultrasound may be a useful tool in the workup of men with Peyronie’s disease and erectile dysfunction.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    Mulhall JP, Creech SD, Boorjian SA, Ghaly S, Kim ED, Moty A, et al. Subjective and objective analysis of the prevalence of Peyronie’s disease in a population of men presenting for prostate cancer screening. J Urol. 2004;171:2350–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Schwarzer U, Sommer F, Klotz T, Braun M, Reifenrath B, Engelmann U. The prevalence of Peyronie’s disease: results of a large survey. BJU Int. 2001;88:727–30.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Terrier JE, Nelson CJ. Psychological aspects of Peyronie’s disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5:290–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Kalokairinou K, Konstantinidis C, Domazou M, Kalogeropoulos T, Kosmidis P, Gekas AUS. Imaging in Peyronie’s disease. J Clin Imaging Sci. 2012;2:63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Wymer K, Ziegelmann M, Savage J, Kohler T, Trost L. Plaque calcification: an important predictor of collagenase clostridium histolyticum treatment outcomes for men with Peyronie’s disease. Urology 2018;119:109–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    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  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hatzimouratidis K, Eardley I, Giuliano F, Hatzichristou D, Moncada I, Salonia A, et al. EAU guidelines on penile curvature. Eur Urol. 2012;62:543–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Lobo JR, Nehra A. Clinical evaluation of erectile dysfunction in the era of PDE-5 inhibitors. Urol Clin North Am. 2005;32:447–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Smith MD, Lipsky J, Pena BM. Development and evaluation of an abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res. 1999;11:319–26.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 1997;49:822–30.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kassouf W, Carrier S. A comparison of the International Index of Erectile Function and erectile dysfunction studies. BJU Int. 2003;91:667–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Serefoglu EC, Smith TM, Kaufman GJ, Liu G, Yafi FA, Hellstrom WJG. Factors associated with erectile dysfunction and the Peyronie’s disease questionnaire in patients with Peyronie disease. Urology 2017;107:155–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Neijenhuijs KI, Holtmaat K, Aaronson NK, Holzner B, Terwee CB, Cuijpers P, et al. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)—a systematic review of measurement properties. J Sex Med. 2019;16:1078–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Hellstrom WJ, Feldman R, Rosen RC, Smith T, Kaufman G, Tursi J. Bother and distress associated with Peyronie’s disease: validation of the Peyronie’s disease questionnaire. J Urol. 2013;190:627–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank everyone involved in the project that helped see it through from start to finish.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas A. Masterson III.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Masterson, T.A., Efimenko, I.V., Nackeeran, S. et al. Discordant erectile function assessment between validated questionnaire scores and penile Doppler ultrasound in Peyronie’s disease. Int J Impot Res (2021).

Download citation


Quick links