So, what have been the results of the ultrasound therapy for Peyronie’s disease? Any breakdown in tissue? What is the protocol — daily, weekly? Does improvement happen over a certain period of time or “therapy” sessions? How long is each session?
Ultrasound has been heavily researched in the general area of how it affects living tissue. See these internet discussions http://cnx.org/content/m16192/latest/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_ultrasound and http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1265028759369 (go down to page 34) to name just a few.
Since the initial research in the early 1940s there has been a growing body of good science that proves ultrasound has definite therapeutic tissue effects, especially the effect of tissue cavitation. But it is necessary to extrapolate this information to the problem of Peyronie’s disease, because no one has taken the time or spent the money to see if it applies to Peyronie’s disease. Having written that, I have had perhaps over the years had 6-8 people report to me at different times that they used US for their PD or DC and that they thought it was helpful. This is certainly not scientific, for sure. But if you and I waited for something truly scientific to be conducted by a drug company or the medical research department of a university concerning non-traditional treatment being used for Peyronie’s disease or Dupuytren’s contracture, we would spend a lot of time sitting on our hands while our conditions worsened. Because I have explored and rationalized so many of these different concepts through, especially the basic concept of synergy and applied it to PD and DC therapy, there are perhaps well over a thousand men and women whose problems have been eliminated or improved in various degrees. By being proactive and using common sense many people have been helped.
I am working now with an idea that the men and women who will be using ultrasound therapy for the PD and DC problems can be used to assemble raw data about the therapeutic effects they experience. Not exactly sure how I will eventually go about doing this, but perhaps I can make it happen.
The therapeutic effect of ultrasound is not to break any tissue down, but simply to increase metabolic activity of the tissue being treated so that natural healing and repair is accelerated. In so doing this, the net effect is often a breakdown of foreign and abnormal cells, and their eventual removal as part of the desired healing process.
Treatment with ultrasound at this time is advised to be done three times weekly, for ten minutes each session; this might change over time as our research and comparison of results gets started. The exact protocol we propose is provided with each ultrasound machine we sell on the PDI and DCI websites, so that each person is doing the therapy the same and in a safe and effective manner.For information about the unit we sell, see ultrasound treatment of Peyronie’s disease and ultrasound treatment of Dupuytren’s contracture.
Ultrasound treatment, following the standard PDI and DCI guidelines that directs all 14 therapies that we suggest, is not proposed as a stand-alone or solo therapy; ultrasound therapy is only one part of a large, diverse and balanced treatment protocol. Anyone who uses only ultrasound therapy to treat these two problems is not following the DCI and PDI concept. As such, when applied correctly the therapeutic benefits will typically develop gradually over time. TRH
3 thoughts on “What have been the results of ultrasound therapy for Peyronie’s disease?”
I used a 1 Mhz ultrasound generator (Medcollator) to treat 3 or 4 Peyronie’s Disease patients circa 1967. They were lost to follow up so I don’t know the outcome. My technique was to apply 5 minutes of US via contact thru a water-based gel medium at 0.5 to 0.75 watts /cm2. TIW. There were no reports of untoward effects reported. PJL PT ret.
Nice to know that a PT was interested in using ultrasound therapy for Peyronie’s disease; many would not be interested in working with this problem.
Back in 1967 only 1MHz ultrasound machines were available since the technology to get up to a higher frequency of 3MHz had not been developed. The lower frequency of 1MHz penetrates deeper than the higher frequency of 3 MHz, and for this reason is more appropriate for the smaller area of Peyronie’s disease.
As is typical of medical practice, you used US as a solo or stand-alone treatment technique, This tends to make US less effective than when combined with other appropriate therapies as is recommended by PDI. Also, the US unit that we use has a much smaller sound head for treatment application. We suggest a total 10 minute treatment time to each mass of scar tissue, applied 3/week. Lastly, we use a water based coupling gel that contains DMSO for added therapeutic value.
Since we do not ever suggest that anyone use solo treatment with any therapy (including ultrasound), I cannot comment about treatment results specifically about US used for Peyronie’s disease. However, I can tell you that 8-10 men report moderate to marked reduction of their PD scar tissue when they use a combination of therapies (almost always including US) when following PDI guidelines. Many men also report their treatment plans suddenly become more effective when US therapy is added to it.
Thank you for your interest in Peyronie’s disease treatment, Paul. TRH
Dr. Herazy, My limited Peyronie’s disease experiences re: application of US to penile tissue came about while working in a large teaching hospital in Pittsburgh, Pa. As you may know, Physical Therapists were required by law to practice by prescription only, so I would have been directed by a physician to apply US for Peyronie’s disease treatment. I venture that I was one of a very small number of PTs to have had the opportunity in that era. I had no idea of what I was doing or of any science behind the treatment. My peers were aghast that I would perform such treatment. I admit to being uncomfortable. I cannot say that I “have an interest” in Peyronie’s disease. I don’t remember how I stumbled upon the internet article to which I responded. It was, however, interesting to learn that I was a bumbling/stumbling pioneer, of sorts. Thank You for your response. Paul