ArticleThe world journal of men's health2014
The efficacy of mirodenafil for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome in middle-aged males.
Article in The world journal of men's health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic Primary Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Men.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023Review
- Contemporary Management of Chronic Prostatitis.Cureus · 2021Review
- Pharmacological interventions for treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Review
- Management of Chronic Prostatitis (CP).Current urology reports · 2018Review
- Recent advances in managing chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.F1000Research · 2017Review
- Anorectal and Pelvic Pain.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of mirodenafil in middle-aged male patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty-eight males with CP/CPPS were randomized to receive either levofloxacin (500 mg/d) (group L, 40 patients) or levofloxacin (500 mg/d) and mirodenafil (50 mg/d) (group ML, 48 patients) for six weeks. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI), and erectile function (EF) domain scores of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire were used to grade symptoms at baseline and 6 weeks after treatment.
resultsThe mean change in total IPSS from baseline was higher in group ML than that in group L (group L, -1.1 vs. group ML, -4.3; p<0.05). Significant improvements were also seen in the IPSS voiding subscore (group L, -0.7 vs. group ML, -3.0; p<0.05). Changes observed in the NIH-CPSI of group ML at six weeks were greater than those at baseline (group L, -3.2 vs. group ML, -7.2; p<0.05). Significant improvements were seen in the NIH-CPSI voiding (group L, -0.5 vs. group ML, -1.7; p<0.05) and quality of life domains (group L, -1.0 vs. group ML, -1.8; p<0.05). Group ML showed a significantly greater increase in the IIEF-EF score than did group ML (group L, +0.2 vs. group ML, +7.8; p<0.05).
conclusionsMirodenafil (50 mg once daily) was well tolerated and resulted in significant symptomatic improvement in middle-aged males with CP/CPPS.
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.