ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2004
[Erectile dysfunction. New drugs with special consideration of the PDE 5 inhibitors].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Avanafil in Chinese Subjects With Erectile Dysfunction: A Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Clinical Trial.Sexual medicine · 2021Article
- Gene transfer for the therapy of erectile dysfunction: progress in the 21st century.International journal of impotence researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Erectile dysfunction (ED) tends to be associated with other diseases, the common basis of which is endothelial dysfunction. ED is also frequently combined with LUTS and the common basis for both conditions seems to be elevation of Rho-kinase activity and decrease of NO concentration. Because all three PDE 5 inhibitors sildenafil, tadalafil, and vardenafil have a common mode of action, i.e., inhibition of PDE 5, they are not different in terms of their efficacy and safety profile except for color vision disturbances which are more common after sildenafil and back pain/myalgia more often observed after tadalafil. The main differentiating characteristics among the three PDE 5 inhibitors are their pharmacokinetics. These are ultimately responsible for the observation that in head-to-head comparative trials depending on the respective study design the overwhelming majority of the patients opted either for tadalafil as the longest acting PDE 5 inhibitor (36 h) or for vardenafil as a relatively rapidly acting drug. All published studies so far have shown that in terms of the cardiovascular risk profile (myocardial infarction rate) all three PDE 5 inhibitors performed better than placebo although the results were not statistically significant. Without any exception it applies to all three PDE 5 inhibitors that they are absolutely contraindicated in patients taking nitrate- or molsidomine-containing medications and that they may interact in particular with non-uroselective alpha-adrenoceptor blockers. This is why their simultaneous application with PDE 5 inhibitors has to be avoided.In the near future chronic (daily) application of a PDE 5 inhibitor may show advantages, at least in those 50-60% of all patients in whom there is a high likelihood of endothelial dysfunction due to the diagnostic (penile duplex Doppler) outcome. Possible new developments in the management of ED with a time frame of 5-8 years until their market approval are guanylate cyclase activators, Rho-kinase inhibitors, melanocortin receptor agonists, gene therapy, and tissue engineering.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.