Aim： To examine the treatment efficacy of Korean Red Ginseng （KRG） in impotent men with erectile dysfunction （ED）. Methods： A total of 60 patients presenting mild or mild to moderate ED were enrolled in a double...Aim： To examine the treatment efficacy of Korean Red Ginseng （KRG） in impotent men with erectile dysfunction （ED）. Methods： A total of 60 patients presenting mild or mild to moderate ED were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in which the efficacies of KRG and a placebo were compared. The patients received either 1 000 mg （3 times daily） of KRG or a placebo. Results： The five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function （IIEF-5） score after the treatment was significantly higher in the KRG group compared with that before the treatment （from 16.4±2.9 to 21.0±6.3, P 〈 0.0001）. In contrast, there was no difference before and after the treatment in the placebo group （from 17.0±3.1 to 17.7±5.6, P 〉 0.05）. In the KRG group, 20 patients （66.6%）, reported improved erection, significant in the global efficacy question （P 〈 0.01）; in the placebo group there was no significance. Scores on questions 2 （rigidity）, 3 （penetration）, 4 and 5 （maintenance）, were significantly higher for KRG than those for the placebo when those questions were answered after 12 weeks of each treatment （P 〈 0.01）. When the score in the KRG group was compared to the placebo group after the treatment, there was a significant improvement in total score （IIEF-5 score） in questions 3 and 5 for the KRG-treated group （P 〈 0.001 and P 〈 0.0001, respectively）. The levels of serum testosterone, prolactine and cholesterol after the treatment were not statistically significant different between the KRG and the placebo group （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion： Our data show that KRG can be an effective alternative to the invasive approaches for treating male ED.展开更多
文摘Aim： To examine the treatment efficacy of Korean Red Ginseng （KRG） in impotent men with erectile dysfunction （ED）. Methods： A total of 60 patients presenting mild or mild to moderate ED were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in which the efficacies of KRG and a placebo were compared. The patients received either 1 000 mg （3 times daily） of KRG or a placebo. Results： The five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function （IIEF-5） score after the treatment was significantly higher in the KRG group compared with that before the treatment （from 16.4±2.9 to 21.0±6.3, P 〈 0.0001）. In contrast, there was no difference before and after the treatment in the placebo group （from 17.0±3.1 to 17.7±5.6, P 〉 0.05）. In the KRG group, 20 patients （66.6%）, reported improved erection, significant in the global efficacy question （P 〈 0.01）; in the placebo group there was no significance. Scores on questions 2 （rigidity）, 3 （penetration）, 4 and 5 （maintenance）, were significantly higher for KRG than those for the placebo when those questions were answered after 12 weeks of each treatment （P 〈 0.01）. When the score in the KRG group was compared to the placebo group after the treatment, there was a significant improvement in total score （IIEF-5 score） in questions 3 and 5 for the KRG-treated group （P 〈 0.001 and P 〈 0.0001, respectively）. The levels of serum testosterone, prolactine and cholesterol after the treatment were not statistically significant different between the KRG and the placebo group （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion： Our data show that KRG can be an effective alternative to the invasive approaches for treating male ED.
