title: Peyronie's disease: contemporary review of non-surgical treatment.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Peyronie's disease (PD) remains a therapeutic dilemma for the treating physician. This is in spite of a large array of treatments which have been used since the time of de la Peyronie in the mid 18(th) century. Part of this problem is due to an incomplete understanding of the etiopathophysiology of this scarring disorder. Having a better understanding of the how and why the scarring occurs may help prevent progression, but ultimately reversing the existing scar remains the real challenge.
  
  
  METHODS
  This review discusses the current non-surgical treatment options for Peyronie's disease. Published articles in peer-reviewed journals are used, recognizing that the majority of the published trials are compromised by being single-center studies without a placebo control.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A variety of treatments options have emerged, most with limited and unreliable benefit, but a few treatments have shown a consistent albeit incomplete response rate. Could this suggest that all PD is not the same and that the heterogeneous nature of this scarring disorder may account for why some patients respond and others do not? Further investigation of this diverse response rate may yield insights into the pathophysiology of PD. In the meantime, there have been many oral treatments offered for PD. Currently the only scientifically sensible treatments appear to be pentoxifylline, L-arginine, and possibly the phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitors. Intralesional injection has been used for many years. The current treatment options include verapamil and interferon, with reported benefit with respect to reduced deformity and improved sexual function. Intralesional clostridial collagenase is in the midst of phase 3 trial analysis by the FDA in the USA and may become the newest and only FDA approved treatment for Peyronie's disease. External mechanical traction therapy has also recently emerged as a technique to reduce curvature, recover lost length, enhance girth, and possibly obviate surgery.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It appears at this time that there is no clear, reliable and effective non-surgical treatment for Peyronie's disease, but it does appear from the published literature that several of the available treatments can result in reduction of deformity, improved sexual function, and may at a minimum stabilize the disease process so that deformity does not get worse particularly during the acute phase of this scarring disorder. Combination therapy in an effort to create a synergy between the chemical effects of oral and injectable drugs with the mechanical effects of external traction therapy may provide the best opportunity today for reduction of deformity in the man with Peyronie's disease.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
authors.forename: Laurence A
authors.initials: LA
authors.lastname: Levine
keywords: Peyronie’s disease; traction; verapamil
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2012 Jan;9(1):288-95
references.pmid: 22024053
references.citation: Int J Impot Res. 2012 Jan-Feb;24(1):1-10
references.pmid: 21918530
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2012 Jan;9(1):302-8
references.pmid: 21981606
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2007 Jul;4(4 Pt 2):1167-73
references.pmid: 17627727
references.citation: Biol Reprod. 2005 Dec;73(6):1199-210
references.pmid: 16093362
references.citation: Br J Plast Surg. 1999 Apr;52(3):205-8
references.pmid: 10474472
references.citation: Nitric Oxide. 2003 Dec;9(4):229-44
references.pmid: 14996430
references.citation: BJU Int. 2010 Nov;106(9):1352-6
references.pmid: 20438568
references.citation: Urol Clin North Am. 2011 May;38(2):195-205
references.pmid: 21621086
references.citation: J Androl. 2011 Sep-Oct;32(5):502-8
references.pmid: 21233397
references.citation: Int J Impot Res. 2000 Sep;12 Suppl 3:S25-31
references.pmid: 11002396
references.citation: J Urol. 2013 Jan;189(1):380-4
references.pmid: 23174244
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2008 Aug;5(8):1977-84
references.pmid: 18564146
references.citation: BJU Int. 2001 Nov;88(7):727-30
references.pmid: 11890244
references.citation: J Urol. 2008 Jun;179(6):2447-55
references.pmid: 18433786
references.citation: Sci STKE. 2002 Feb 12;2002(119):pe6
references.pmid: 11842240
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 May 28;93(11):5478-82
references.pmid: 8643600
references.citation: J Orthop Res. 1995 Jan;13(1):67-77
references.pmid: 7853106
references.citation: J Cell Biol. 1984 May;98(5):1662-71
references.pmid: 6327718
references.citation: Eur Urol. 2009 Aug;56(2):363-9
references.pmid: 19473751
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2011 Dec;8(12):3446-51
references.pmid: 21981553
references.citation: BJU Int. 2010 Oct;106(8):1178-80
references.pmid: 20438558
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996 Sep;78(9):1337-47
references.pmid: 8816648
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2009 Feb;6(2):558-66
references.pmid: 19138361
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2008 Jun;5(6):1468-73
references.pmid: 18373527
references.citation: J Urol. 2006 Jul;176(1):394-8
references.pmid: 16753449
references.citation: J Urol. 2012 Jun;187(6):2268-74
references.pmid: 22503048
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2010 Jul;7(7):2359-74
references.pmid: 20497306
references.citation: J Urol. 2006 Jun;175(6):2115-8; discussion 2118
references.pmid: 16697815
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2008 Aug;5(8):1985-90
references.pmid: 18554257
references.citation: J Urol. 2004 Jul;172(1):259-62
references.pmid: 15201789
references.citation: J Urol. 2004 Jun;171(6 Pt 1):2350-3
references.pmid: 15126819
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2012 Sep;9(9):2396-403
references.pmid: 22900621
references.citation: J Sex Med. 2011 Feb;8(2):518-23
references.pmid: 20955309
references.citation: J Hand Surg Br. 1994 Aug;19(4):528-33
references.pmid: 7964108
references.citation: Int Urol Nephrol. 2009;41(3):467-71
references.pmid: 19199072