ArticleBioscience reports2017
Comprehensive assessment of cavernosography with 320-row dynamic volume CT versus conventional cavernosography in erectile dysfunction patients caused by venous leakage.
Article in Bioscience reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful Treatment of Glans Tumescence Dysfunction Caused by Abnormal Venous Communication Between the Great Saphenous Vein and the Deep Dorsal Vein: A Case Report.Case reports in urology · 2026Article
- Intracavernosal pressure of the erect penis in children with hypospadias.International journal of impotence research · 2024Article
- Erectile dysfunction: role of computed tomography cavernosography in the diagnosis and treatment planning of venous leak.CVIR endovascular · 2023Review
- Advances in physical diagnosis and treatment of male erectile dysfunction.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Review
- Abnormal deep dorsal vein resulting in veno-occlusive erectile dysfunction.BMJ case reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aims to investigate and compare the diagnostic and prognostic value of cavernosography with 320-row dynamic volume computed tomography (DVCT) versus conventional cavernosography in men with erectile dysfunction (ED) caused by venous leakage. A total of 174 patients diagnosed with ED were enrolled and received cavernosography with 320-row DVCT (DVCT group) and conventional cavernosography scans (control group) respectively. The diagnosis, complications, and prognosis of patients were evaluated. The DVCT group provided high-resolution images with less processing and testing time, as well as lowered radiological agent and contrast agent compared with the control group. In the DVCT group, 89 patients who were diagnosed with venous ED had six various venous leakage, namely superficial venous leakage, profundus venous leakage, the mixed type, cavernosal venous leakage, crural venous leakage, and also venous leakage between the penis and urethra cavernosum (9, 21, 32, 6, 18, and 3 cases respectively). Similarly, 74 patients out of the 81 who suffered from venous ED were classified to have superficial venous leakage (11), profundus venous leakage (14), the mixed type venous leakage (26), and middle venous leakage (23). Six out of 25 patients in the DVCT group, had improvements in ED while the remaining 19 achieved full erectile function recovery with no penile fibrosis and erectile pain. Cavernosography with 320-row DVCT is a reliable system that can be used to diagnose ED caused by venous leakage. This is especially useful in accurately determining the type of venous and allows for a better prognosis and direction of treatment.
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.