Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Urology. 1999 Nov;54(5):891-3.

Vacuum constriction devices for erectile dysfunction: a long-term, prospective study of patients with mild, moderate, and severe dysfunction.

Author information

  • 1Department of Urology, New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, New York 10021, USA.



To evaluate, using a long-term, prospective study, the satisfaction rate, attrition rate, and follow-up treatment of well-trained patients using an external vacuum erection device, the Osbon ErecAid System, in the treatment of mild, moderate, and severe organic erectile dysfunction.


One hundred twenty-nine patients were assessed to determine the severity and cause of their erectile dysfunction. Patients with organic erectile dysfunction who were interested in the Osbon ErecAid received the device after thorough training. Patients received a follow-up questionnaire regarding satisfaction, months of use, reasons for discontinuing, and further treatment.


Our attrition rate was 65% overall and was lowest among patients with moderate erectile dysfunction (55%). All patients with mild dysfunction discontinued use, and a large number (70%) of patients with complete dysfunction also discontinued use. Of the patients who discontinued, most stopped treatment early (median 1 month, mean 4 months) and 63% did not seek further treatment. Thirty-five percent of patients were satisfied with the device and have continued to use it long term (mean 37 months).


Our study showed a lower success rate than previous reports. Patients who were satisfied with the Osbon ErecAid continued to use it for long periods. Patients who were not satisfied dropped out very quickly, and many did not seek further treatment. Patients with moderate erectile dysfunction had a higher rate of success than patients with mild or severe erectile dysfunction.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk