The corpus cavernosum after treatment with dutasteride or finasteride: A histomorphometric study in a benign prostatic hyperplasia rodent model


#1

This is a very interesting recent paper (published June 8th, 2018).

ABSTRACT
Erectile dysfunction is a common side effect of finasteride and dutasteride treatments. The objective of this study was to investigate the structural changes in the penis using a benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) rodent model treated with dutasteride or finasteride. Sixty male rats were divided into the following groups: C, untreated control rats; C + D, control rats receiving dutasteride; C + F, control rats receiving finasteride; H, untreated spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs); H + D, SHRs treated with dutasteride; and H + F, SHRs treated with finasteride. Treatments were performed for 40 days, and penises were collected immediately thereafter. The organs were analyzed using histomorphometric methods to determine the cross-sectional penile area, as well as the surface density (Sv) of smooth muscle fibers, connective tissue, elastic system fibers, and sinusoidal spaces of the corpus cavernosum. The results were compared using a one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s posttest. Groups C + D and C + F had a significantly smaller penile cross-sectional area, but more elastic system fiber Sv compared to Group C. Group C + D showed less smooth muscle Sv, and Group H showed more connective tissue but a smaller sinusoidal space Sv in the corpus cavernosum compared to Group C. Groups H + D and H + F had less smooth muscle Sv than Group H. Group H + D also had more connective tissue and elastic system fiber Sv than Group H. Both dutasteride and finasteride promoted penile modifications in the control rat penis, although this affect was greater in Group H animals. In this rodent model, dutasteride was the drug that most affected the corpus cavernosum.

Full text available at:
http://www.ajandrology.com/preprintarticle.asp?id=233923


#2

It would be great if someone who has followed this type of rat research and understands it better than me comments on the significance of this paper. Is it telling us anything new or significant?