ArticleArab journal of urology2016
Surgical outcomes and complications of Tube® (Promedon) malleable penile prostheses in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction.
Article in Arab journal of urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Penile prosthesis implantation: a systematic review of intraoperative and postoperative complications.International journal of impotence research · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of penile prosthesis infection and meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus role.BMC urology · 2021Pooled it
- Update on penile prosthesis.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Review
- Management of tunica albuginea disruption secondary to malleable penile implant fracture: insights into etiology and surgical approach.Basic and clinical andrology · 2025Article
- Current devices, outcomes, and pain management considerations in penile implant surgery: an updated review of the literature.Asian journal of andrology · 2024Review
- Surgical patient selection and counseling.Translational andrology and urology · 2017Review
- Malleable Penile Prosthesis Fractures: Lessons Learned from 17 Years of Experience at a Tertiary Center in Brazil.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- State-of-art review of current malleable penile prosthesis devices in the commercial market.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate surgical outcome, complications, and patients satisfaction with the Tube® (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) malleable penile prosthesis in diabetic and non-diabetic patients with refractory erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND
methodsThe records of 128 eligible patients who received Tube malleable penile prostheses at our institute between September 2008 and October 2015 were reviewed.
resultsOf the 128 patients, who received Tube penile prostheses at our institute, 53 were diabetics and 75 were non-diabetics. Both groups of patients were comparable for mean age, education level, marital status, hospital stay, time to commencing sexual intercourse, and median follow-up. Complications included: inter-corporeal septal perforation (2.3%), glanular urethral injury (1.5%), acute urinary retention (3.9%), superficial wound infection (7%), penile discomfort (9.4%), and penile prostheses infection (5.5%). Moreover, 3.9% developed atrophy of the cavernosal tissue, 5.5% experienced bad cosmesis, 6.3% experienced ejaculatory disorders, and 2.3% developed bladder calculi. In all, 13 prostheses (9.4%) were removed, seven of them due to infection, three on the patients' demand and three due to mechanical failure. The satisfaction rates with the prostheses were 77.3% and 79.4% in the diabetic and non-diabetic patients, respectively; with an overall satisfaction rate of 78.5%. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients.
conclusionTube malleable penile prostheses are associated with low complication and high satisfaction rates. There was no significant difference in the complication rate or prostheses infection between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. A prospective comparative study with a large number of patients is recommended.
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.