Trial reportInternational journal of impotence research2019
The intra-meatal application of alprostadil cream (Vitaros®) improves drug efficacy and patient's satisfaction: results from a randomized, two-administration route, cross-over clinical trial.
Trial report in International journal of impotence research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of topical and intraurethral alprostadil on erectile function: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Andrology · 2025Pooled it
- Addressing unmet needs for patients with erectile dysfunction: a narrative review of topical therapies.Sexual medicine · 2025Review
- IcarifilJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Italian Society of Andrology and Sexual Medicine (SIAMS), along with ten other Italian Scientific Societies, guidelines on the diagnosis and management of erectile dysfunction.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2023Article
- Combination therapy with topical alprostadil and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors after failure of oral therapy in patients with erectile dysfunction: a prospective, two-arm, open-label, non-randomized study.International journal of impotence research · 2022Article
- The Use of Vasoactive Drugs in the Treatment of Male Erectile Dysfunction: Current Concepts.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Hard flaccid syndrome: initial report of four cases.International journal of impotence research · 2020Article
- A Review of Current and Emerging Therapeutic Options for Erectile Dysfunction.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the efficacy, tolerability, and patient's preference of alprostadil cream for topical use administered within the urethral meatus versus the standard administration route, in erectile dysfunction (ED) treatment. Seventy-one patients (mean age 59.7 ± 9.0 years) affected by ED were analyzed in this multicenter, randomized, two-administration routes, cross-over trial. All patients received a single dose of alprostadil cream applying the dispenser to the tip of the penis (without contacting the urethral meatus) (Standard administration route or ST.AR) alternating with a single dose of alprostadil cream applying the dispenser within the urethral meatus (New administration route or NEW.AR) separated by a one-week washout period, according to randomization. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the change in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) total score from baseline to the control visit by comparing the ST.AR and NEW.AR. Secondary objectives of the study were to compare the different methods of administration by evaluating the change in the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP-2 and SEP-3) questionnaire score and the Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) by scoring the Patient Self-Assessment of Erection (PSAE) questionnaire. The treatment safety profile was assessed by analysis of adverse events (AEs). Based on the study findings it is evident that the NEW.AR is more efficacious than the ST.AR in improving IIEF-5 and SEP scores from baseline to control visit (IIEF-5: +3.8 vs +6.3; p < 0.001; positive response to SEP-2: 10 vs 27; p = 0.002) and in terms of PSAE (a significant improvement from the baseline in 31% of patients; p < 0.001). As regards the safety profile, no difference in terms of local and systemic side effects was found.
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.