Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25056808›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of impotence research

A comparison of different oral therapies versus no treatment for erectile dysfunction in 196 radical nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy patients.

A Natali, L Masieri, M Lanciotti, S Giancane, G Vignolini, M Carini, S Serni

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of impotence research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Functional recovery after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.Yeungnam University journal of medicine · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A NataliDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
L MasieriDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
M LanciottiDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
S GiancaneDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
G VignoliniDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
M CariniDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
S SerniDepartment of Urology, Uro-Andrological Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
University of Florence · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We retrospectively analyzed the effects on the erectile function (EF) of no treatment (NT), and an oral therapy (OT; on-demand therapy (OD) or a regimented rehabilitation (RR) program with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is)), in a cohort of 196 consecutive patients following nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy (NSRRP). Patients undergoing bilateral NSRRP (BP; n = 147) and unilateral NSRRP (UP; n = 49), chose between OT (PDE5-Is OD or RR program) and NT. Patients who chose OD therapy received PDE5-Is (100 mg sildenafil, 20 mg tadalafil and vardenafil), whereas patients who chose the RR program received 100 mg sildenafil or 20 mg vardenafil three times a week, or 20 mg tadalafil twice a week at bedtime. The t-test for unpaired data and Fisher test were used for univariate analyses, logistic regression multivariate analysis was used to test the accuracy of available variables to predict EF recovery after radical prostatectomy. Potency rates were significantly correlated with the surgical technique and with OT when compared to NT (P < 0.02), respectively 68.7% for BP (61% with no therapy and 71% with PDE5-Is) and 44% for UP (29% with no therapy and 51% with PDE5-Is), while no statistically significative differences were found between OD and rehabilitation protocols (72% with rehabilitation and 70% with OD therapy in BP, 52% with rehabilitation and 50% with OD therapy in UP; P = NS). Early OT with PDE5-Is (OD or RR program) was superior to NT in recovery of EF in NSRRP. Furthermore, an RR program with PDE5-Is did not appear to be superior to OD therapy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCarbolinesErectile DysfunctionHumansImidazolesMaleMiddle AgedPenisPhosphodiesterase 5 InhibitorsPiperazinesProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsPurinesRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesCarbolinesImidazolesPhosphodiesterase 5 InhibitorsPiperazinesPurinesSildenafil CitrateSulfonamidesSulfonesTadalafilTriazinesVardenafil Dihydrochloride

Identifiers

PMID25056808
OpenAlexW2073753430

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.