Endocrine Abstracts

Introduction: Chronic inflammation has been found to play an important role in the development of cardiovascular risk factors and erectile dysfunction (ED). Metabolic syndrome (MS) is associated with endothelial dysfunction and higher cardiovascular risk. The end point of this study was to investigate the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in patients with ED in comparison with control subjects and to analyse the association with acute phase reactants (CRP, ESR) and hormone levels.

Methods/Design: This case-control study included 65 patients, 37 with erectile dysfunction, according to the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) from the Urology Department of San Cecilio University Hospital, Granada (Spain), and 28 healthy controls. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome was calculated according to ATP-III criteria. Hormone levels and acute phase parameters were studied in samples drawn between 0800 and 0900 h after a rest period of ≥30 min.

Results: The mean age of patients with ED was 55.8±7.7 years vs. 52.5±4.8 years in the control group (P=0.06). The ATP-III criteria for MS were met by 64.9% of the patients with ED and only 9.5% of the controls (P<0.0001, OR=17.53, 95% CI: 3.52–87.37). Binary logistic regression analysis showed a strong association between patients with ED and MS, even after additional adjustment for confounding factors (OR=20.05, 95% CI: 1.24–32.82, P<0.034). Patients with hypogonadism presented a significantly higher prevalence of metabolic syndrome. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that systolic BP and CRP predicted 0.46 (model R2) of IIEF changes.

Conclusions: Chronic inflammation found in patients with ED might explain the association between ED and metabolic syndrome. Cardiovascular screening by MS criteria assessment in patients with ED may be useful to detect at-risk individuals and start preventive treatment against the development of cardiovascular disease.

Declaration of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.

Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sector.