ArticleCurrent sexual health reports2018
Penile Rehabilitation: The "Up"-date.
Article in Current sexual health reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Penile Rehabilitation After Surgery for Prostate Cancer: An Umbrella Review on Traditional Approaches and Novel Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to review the penile rehabilitation literature published since the beginning of 2017. Specific emphasis was placed on determining how the new findings increase our understanding of the mechanisms leading to recovery of erectile function after pelvic surgery and to identify potential focus areas for future studies. RECENT
findingsA meta-analysis of penile rehabilitation after prostatectomy was published in early 2017 reporting that PDE-5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection (ICI) therapy and vacuum erection devices (VED) improved erectile function; however, the benefit was not observed after a washout period. Preclinical studies have identified potential regenerative therapies after cavernous nerve injury. SUMMARY: While significant methodological challenges remain, recent literature suggests benefits to starting penile rehabilitation immediately after surgery, but not extending past 1 year post-operatively. The cost-benefit ratio of penile rehabilitation remains unclear; however, decreasing costs of PDE-5 inhibitors as well as improvements in characterizing post-surgical erectile dysfunction may help to personalize penile rehabilitation, improve outcomes and improve the cost-benefit ratio. Better and more consistent trial design is needed to develop the optimal regimen(s) for restoring sexual function in men. Finally, future studies to translate promising preclinical regeneration therapies to humans are also needed.
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.