ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2017
Penile implants: a look into the future.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Two-step Technique for Penile Lengthening: Suspensory Ligament Release with Autologous Dermal-fat Graft and Spermatic Cord-associated Fat Reinforcement Prevents Postoperative Retraction.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Postoperative management with a single scheduled outpatient appointment following penile prosthesis placement does not create undue healthcare system burden.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Does time of intraoperative exposure to the aerobiome increase microbial growth on inflatable penile prostheses?International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Addressing the need for preclinical study of penile prosthesis infection: a new animal model and narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- A narrative review on malleable and inflatable penile implants: choosing the right implant for the right patient.International journal of impotence research · 2023Review
- A prospective study analyzing both inflation and deflation preference for commonly available inflatable penile prostheses.International journal of impotence research · 2021Article
- Comparing the Italian and North American prospective registries on penile prosthesis surgery: are there relevant differences in treatment indications and patients' management?International journal of impotence research · 2021Article
- Neurogenic bladder is an independent risk factor for complications associated with inflatable penile prosthesis implantation.International journal of impotence research · 2020Article
- Infrapubic approach for placement of inflatable penile prosthesis: contemporary review of technique and implications.International journal of impotence research · 2020Review
- Ambulatory urodynamic monitoring: state of the art and future directions.Nature reviews. Urology · 2019Review
- Commercial Insurance Coverage for Inflatable Penile Prosthesis at a Tertiary Care Center.Urology practice · 2019Article
- A novel proposal to address the future of penile prosthetics: are we currently focused in the wrong direction?Translational andrology and urology · 2017Article
- Fundamentals of prosthetic urology.Asian journal of andrologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) has been around since the 1970's as a durable and one-time cure for erectile dysfunction (ED). For the past 40 years, many changes have been made to make the device better and currently IPP boasts a high percentage of long-term patient satisfaction. The next paradigm shift in IPP treatment for ED is upon us. Funding for ED related medications and devices has been a hot topic in health policy over the last 10 years. This suggests that the device must improve and patient advocacy and education must increase for IPP to remain as a viable solution for ED. In this paper, we conduct a literature search for innovations in IPP and argue that IPP must constantly improve to compete with oral, injectable, shockwave, and potentially gene therapies.
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.