Surrey Cardiovascular Clinic · Clinical Insight CARDIOVASCULAR PREVENTION

Why a cardiovascular clinic started running men's health clinics

men's healtherectile dysfunctioncardiovascular diseaseinsulin resistanceprostate healthendothelial dysfunction
The readable edition Back to the main article The plain-English version on Surrey Cardiovascular Clinic, with the audio podcast.
Disclosure: This article is part of the SCVC Educational Series by Dr Edward Leatham and is intended for educational purposes for patients and clinicians. It does not constitute individual medical advice. Always consult your clinician. Patients concerned about their metabolic or cardiovascular risk should discuss assessment with their GP or clinician. This referenced version is published in UK English only. The blog post is available in multiple languages via the Surrey Cardiovascular Clinic website.
🧠 AI Companion Pack — an evidence-graded version of this article, built for feeding to your AI assistant.New to this? See what the pack contains, and how to use it ↓
01

The Men Who Only Half-Ask

There is a pattern I have noticed over many years of consulting. A man comes in for his heart — a borderline calcium score, a family history of early coronary disease, a cholesterol result his GP rightly took seriously. We work through it thoroughly. Then, as the consultation draws to a close, something shifts. He mentions almost in passing that his waist has expanded by two inches over the past few years and he cannot quite account for it. Or that things are not working the way they used to in the bedroom. Or that his mate had a PSA test and ended up going through a biopsy for a cancer that turned out to be nothing, and he wonders whether he should bother.

These questions are asked quietly, often framed as afterthoughts, by men who do not routinely see their GP and who would not dream of booking an appointment specifically to discuss them. The cardiology consultation becomes, by default, the place where they surface. That is not a complaint. It is a clinical observation that tells us something important: these men experience their health as a whole, even when medicine divides it into specialties. The cardiovascular risk, the metabolic creep around the middle, the sexual function and the prostate concern are, in their minds, part of the same story of a body getting older and possibly letting them down.

They are more right than they know. The physiological threads connecting these four domains are real, well described in the literature, and clinically actionable. 1,2 That is why we built a men's health service around them.

THE PSA PROBLEM — AND WHY IT IS NOT A REASON TO DO NOTHING

The controversy around PSA testing has never been a dispute about whether prostate cancer matters. It is a dispute about the arithmetic of testing men who feel entirely well. A raised PSA is not a diagnosis. It is a signal that can be generated by cancer, by benign prostatic enlargement, by prostatitis, by vigorous exercise before the blood draw, or by nothing identifiable at all. Until relatively recently, a raised result led fairly directly to a transrectal biopsy, and a substantial proportion of those biopsies found either nothing significant or a cancer so biologically indolent that detecting it caused more harm than ignoring it would have done. 3 The false positive and overdiagnosis problem is a legitimate concern. It is why, in March 2026, the UK National Screening Committee confirmed that it does not recommend population screening for prostate cancer across the general male population.

Part of that caution reflects an evidence gap the NHS is actively trying to close. TRANSFORM, the current UK trial, is comparing PSA-alone screening against a combined PSA-and-MRI approach, to establish which offers the better balance of benefit and harm before any national screening programme is considered — but the trial isn't due to report until the end of 2027, so this is a decision the NHS won't revisit for at least another year or two.4 Even once those results are in, a population-wide MRI-based screening programme in the UK looks unlikely to be funded, given that the great majority of men screened will be entirely healthy and MRI capacity is expensive to scale nationally. The European Union, meanwhile, is moving on its own timetable rather than waiting for TRANSFORM: in September 2022 the European Commission proposed extending organised, risk-stratified cancer screening programmes to include prostate cancer, alongside lung and (in higher-incidence regions) gastric cancer, with member states now working through a stepwise rollout — including, per current clinical guidance, a PSA-then-MRI pathway.5

What has changed is the diagnostic pathway that now sits behind an abnormal result. Multiparametric MRI performed before any biopsy, interpreted using PI-RADS scoring, combined with PSA density adjusted for prostate gland volume, has transformed the landscape. A man with a mildly raised PSA and an MRI showing no suspicious findings is in a fundamentally different clinical position from the same man a decade ago — though it's worth being clear that neither a normal PSA nor a clear MRI completely excludes prostate cancer, which is part of why ongoing monitoring still matters. The biopsy rate for low-risk signals has fallen considerably, and when biopsy is indicated, targeted sampling guided by MRI findings reduces both the procedure burden and the rate of clinically insignificant cancer detection.

We offer individual PSA testing as part of a broader men's health assessment. This is not an NHS population-screening programme, and we explain the potential benefits and harms of PSA testing so that each man can make an informed choice — the test can be declined without affecting the rest of the assessment. Where a man chooses to go ahead, that sits within an informed, structured conversation about his individual risk profile — family history, ethnicity, PSA trajectory over time — and clear onward pathways to urology when they are needed. The goal is to move men from vague anxiety or complete avoidance into the kind of active, monitored relationship with their prostate health that actually serves them.

02

Cardiovascular Risk and the Metabolic Middle

The two inches of extra waist circumference that men mention almost apologetically is, in cardiovascular terms, one of the most important physical signs in the consultation room. Visceral adipose tissue — the fat that accumulates around the abdominal organs rather than subcutaneously — is metabolically active in ways that subcutaneous fat is not. 6 It releases inflammatory cytokines, drives insulin resistance and contributes directly to dyslipidaemia of the atherogenic pattern: elevated triglycerides, suppressed HDL, and a predominance of small dense LDL particles that are particularly efficient at penetrating the arterial wall and initiating plaque formation. 7

This is not simply a story about weight. Men who gain visceral fat in their forties and fifties are undergoing a metabolic shift that precedes clinically detectable type 2 diabetes by years, sometimes by a decade. 8 Fasting glucose and HbA1c at standard thresholds will appear reassuring long after insulin resistance is already elevating cardiovascular risk meaningfully. 9 A fasting insulin level, or better still a HOMA-IR calculation from fasting glucose and insulin together, gives a much earlier picture of where that individual sits on the trajectory from metabolic health to metabolic disease. 10

The connection to testosterone is real but frequently misunderstood. Low testosterone does not simply cause symptoms of tiredness and reduced libido. It is independently associated with increased visceral fat deposition, insulin resistance and unfavourable lipid profiles. 11 The relationship runs in both directions: visceral obesity suppresses testosterone through aromatisation of androgens to oestrogen in adipose tissue, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that neither lifestyle intervention nor cardiovascular medication alone addresses completely. 12

ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION — THE CARDIOVASCULAR SYMPTOM MEN DO NOT RECOGNISE

Erectile function depends on healthy endothelium. The process of erection is fundamentally a vascular event: nitric oxide released from endothelial cells in the penile vasculature causes smooth muscle relaxation and arterial dilatation, allowing the corpus cavernosum to fill. 13 When the endothelium is inflamed, stiffened or compromised by early atherosclerosis, that signal is blunted. Erectile dysfunction, in a man in his forties or fifties who has not been diagnosed with cardiovascular disease, is frequently the earliest visible manifestation of systemic endothelial dysfunction — the same process that, given years and additional risk factor exposure, will eventually affect the coronary and cerebral circulation. 2,14

The Princeton Consensus, a framework developed specifically to guide clinicians on the relationship between sexual activity and cardiovascular risk, stratifies men with erectile dysfunction by their overall cardiovascular risk profile and recommends appropriate investigation before treatment. What it makes explicit is that erectile dysfunction and cardiovascular disease are not simply associated by shared risk factors: they are expressions of the same underlying arterial pathology, often appearing sequentially with erectile dysfunction running several years ahead of symptomatic coronary disease. 15,16

For GPs and patients, the practical implication is this: a man in his late forties who presents with new erectile dysfunction and who has not had a recent cardiovascular risk assessment should have one promptly. 17 A QRISK3 score, a full lipid profile including non-HDL cholesterol, a blood pressure measurement and a fasting glucose will tell you a great deal. The erectile dysfunction is not embarrassing peripheral noise — it is a clinical flag that belongs in the cardiovascular conversation, and treating it as such is both better medicine and more useful to the man sitting in the chair. 2,15

Key Takeaways

References

  1. Vlachopoulos C, Rokkas K, Ioakeimidis N, Stefanadis C. . Eur Urol. 2007;52(6):1590–600. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.08.004
  2. Gandaglia G, Briganti A, Jackson G, Kloner RA, Montorsi F, Montorsi P, et al. . Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):968–78. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.023
  3. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, Lucia MS, Miller GJ, Ford LG, et al. . N Engl J Med. 2003;349(3):215–24. doi:10.1056/nejmoa030660
  4. TRANSFORM https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13801649 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN13801649
  5. European Commission. Proposal for a Council Recommendation on strengthening prevention through early detection: A new EU approach on cancer screening, replacing Council Recommendation 2003/878/EC. COM(2022) 474 final, 20 September 2022. Recommends Member States extend organised, risk-stratified cancer screening programmes to include prostate cancer (alongside lung, and gastric cancer in higher-incidence regions) via a stepwise approach; the Recommendation itself does not mandate a specific test sequence — the PSA-then-MRI pathway reflects current clinical guidance on implementation, per Prof Stephen Langley, Professor of Urology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust.
  6. Després JP, Lemieux I. . Nature. 2006;444(7121):881–7. doi:10.1038/nature05488
  7. Eckel RH, Grundy SM, Zimmet PZ. . Lancet. 2005;365(9468):1415–28. )66378-7. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66378-7
  8. Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, et al. . Lancet. 2012;380(9859):2224–60. )61766-8. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61766-8
  9. Abdullah M Alshehri Metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk J Family Community Med 2010 May;17(2):73-8. doi:10.4103/1319-1683.71987
  10. Inker LA, Levey AS, Coresh J. . Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014;9(1):1–3. doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2017.10.004
  11. Rao PM, Kelly DM, Jones TH. . Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2013;9(8):479–93. doi:10.1038/nrendo.2013.122
  12. Corona G, Rastrelli G, Monami M, Saad F, Luconi M, Lucchese M, et al. . Eur J Endocrinol. 2013;168(6):829–43. doi:10.1530/eje-12-0955
  13. Isidori AM, Giannetta E, Gianfrilli D, Greco EA, Bonifacio V, Aversa A, et al. . Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2005;63(4):381–94. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2265.2005.02350.x
  14. Montorsi P, Ravagnani PM, Galli S, Rotatori F, Veglia F, Briganti A, et al. . Eur Heart J. 2006;27(22):2632–9. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehl142
  15. Michael Böhm et al Erectile dysfunction predicts cardiovascular events in high-risk patients receiving telmisartan, ramipril, or both: The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial/Telmisartan Randomized AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease (ONTARGET/TRANSCEND) Trials Circulation. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.864199
  16. Fang SC, Rosen RC, Vita JA, Ganz P, Kupelian V. . J Sex Med. 2015;12(3):757–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12715. doi:10.1111/jsm.12715
  17. Martin SA, Atlantis E, Lange K, Taylor AW, O'Loughlin P, Wittert GA. . J Sex Med. 2014;11(5):1136–47. doi:10.1111/jsm.12483

Read the plain-text blog post — accessible in multiple languages via auto-translate — at https://www.scvc.co.uk/diagnostic-health-screening/mens-health-cardiovascular-clinic/

🎧 Prefer to listen? A Google NotebookLM audio podcast version may be available on the blog post above.

Surrey Cardiovascular Clinic  ·  www.scvc.co.uk/diagnostic-health-screening/mens-health-cardiovascular-clinic/
This article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional. © 2026 Medicalspace Ltd / Surrey Cardiovascular Clinic
This referenced version is published in UK English only and is not auto-translated. Read the translated blog post →
🧠 AI Companion PackVTEF · evidence-graded

A structured, evidence-graded version of this article — every claim tagged 🟢 established · 🔵 strong · 🟡 moderate · 🟠 emerging · 🔴 hypothesis — built for feeding to your AI assistant.

↗ Open the pack
Or send it straight to →

Copy pastes the whole pack plus instructions into any AI. NotebookLM brief downloads the file to add as a source.

How & why we built this →↑ Back to the top