Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16060698›Full record

ReviewDrugs2005

A comparative review of the options for treatment of erectile dysfunction: which treatment for which patient?

Konstantinos Hatzimouratidis, Dimitrios G Hatzichristou

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 167 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Erectile dysfunction A clinical overview with perspectives from African settings.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Novel Emerging Therapies for Erectile Dysfunction.The world journal of men's health · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Konstantinos HatzimouratidisCenter for Sexual and Reproductive Health, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. hatzichr@med.auth.gr
Dimitrios G Hatzichristou
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of erectile dysfunction (ED) has been revolutionised over the last two decades. Several treatment options are available today, most of which are associated with high efficacy rates and favourable safety profiles. A MEDLINE search was undertaken in order to evaluate all currently available data on treatment modalities for ED. Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors (sildenafil, tadalafil, vardenafil) are currently the first-choice of most physicians and patients for the treatment of ED. PDE5 inhibitors have differences in their pharmacological profiles, the most obvious being the long duration of action of tadalafil, but there are no data supporting superiority for any one of them in terms of efficacy or safety. Sublingual apomorphine has limited efficacy compared with the PDE5 inhibitors, and its use is limited to patients with mild ED. Treatment failures with oral drugs may be due to medication, clinician and patient issues. The physician needs to address all of these issues in order to identify true treatment failures. Patients who are truly unresponsive to oral drugs may be offered other treatment options.Intracavernous injections of alprostadil alone, or in combination with other vasoactive agents (papaverine and phentolamine), remain an excellent treatment option, with proven efficacy and safety over time. Topical pharmacotherapy is appealing in nature, but currently available formulations have limited efficacy. Vacuum constriction devices may be offered mainly to elderly patients with occasional intercourse attempts, as younger patients show limited preference because of the unnatural erection that is associated with this treatment modality. Penile prostheses are generally the last treatment option offered, because of invasiveness, cost and non-reversibility; however, they are associated with high satisfaction rates in properly selected patients. All treatment options are associated with particular strengths and weaknesses. A patient-centred approach based on patient needs and expectations is necessary for the management of ED. The clinician must educate the patient and provide a supportive environment for shared decision making. The management strategy must be supplemented by careful follow-up in order to identify changes in patient health and relationship/emotional status that may necessitate treatment optimisation.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAlprostadilApomorphineCarbolinesConstrictionContraindicationsDopamine AgonistsDrug CombinationsEnzyme InhibitorsErectile DysfunctionHumansImidazolesMalePapaverinePatient SatisfactionPenile ProsthesisAlprostadilApomorphineCarbolinesDopamine AgonistsDrug CombinationsEnzyme InhibitorsImidazolesPapaverinePhentolaminePhosphodiesterase InhibitorsPiperazinesPurinesSildenafil CitrateSulfonesTadalafilTriazinesVardenafil DihydrochlorideVasodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID16060698
OpenAlexW2024876112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.