Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25868558›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2015

Landmarks in erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy.

Emmanuel Weyne, Fabio Castiglione, Frank Van der Aa, Trinity J Bivalacqua, Maarten Albersen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Penile rehabilitation for postprostatectomy erectile dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Emmanuel WeyneLaboratory for Experimental Urology, Department of Development and Regeneration, University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, Box 802, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Fabio CastiglioneUrological Research Institute, San Raffaele Scientific Institution, via Olgettina 60, 20132 Milano, Italy.
Frank Van der AaLaboratory for Experimental Urology, Department of Development and Regeneration, University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, Box 802, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Trinity J BivalacquaThe James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Marburg 420, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
Maarten AlbersenLaboratory for Experimental Urology, Department of Development and Regeneration, University of Leuven, Herestraat 49, Box 802, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The description of the nerve-sparing technique of radical prostatectomy by Walsh was one of the major breakthroughs in the surgical treatment of prostate cancer in the 20(th) century. However, despite this advance and consequent technological refinements to nerve-sparing surgery, a large proportion of men still suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED) as a complication of prostatectomy. A plethora of therapeutic approaches have been proposed to optimize erectile function recovery in these patients. Several preclinical and translational studies have shown benefits of therapies including PDE5 inhibitor (PDE5I) treatment, immunomodulation, neurotrophic factor administration, and regenerative techniques, such as stem cell therapy, in animal models. However, most of these approaches have either failed to translate to clinical use or have yet to be studied in human subjects. Penile rehabilitation with PDE5Is is currently the most commonly used clinical strategy, in spite of the absence of solid clinical evidence to support its use.

Indexed as

Anatomic LandmarksRecovery of FunctionErectile DysfunctionHumansMalePenile ErectionPenisProstatectomyProstatic Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID25868558

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.