Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31555563›Full record

ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2019

Erectile dysfunction management after failed phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor trial: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Rachel A Moses, Ross E Anderson, Jaewhan Kim, Sorena Keihani, James R Craig, Jeremy B Myers, Sara M Lenherr, William O Brant, James M Hotaling

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Access to penile prostheses differ across provinces in Canada: A survey of Canadian urologists.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2021
    Article
  8. [Penile prosthesis].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2021
    Review
  9. The GenusFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel A MosesSection of Urology, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Ross E AndersonDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Jaewhan KimDepartment of Health and Kinesiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Sorena KeihaniDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
James R CraigDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Jeremy B MyersDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Sara M LenherrDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
William O BrantVeterans Affairs Hospital, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
James M HotalingDivision of Urology, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
University of Utah · USDartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center · USVeterans Health Administration · US

Funding

Utah Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR002538 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI HESS, RACHEL, MAJERSIK, JENNIFER JUHL · 2018 to 2022
$26.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002538
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternate erectile dysfunction (ED) management options after failed first line phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors (PDE5-I).

methodsAn empiric, repetitive decision tree analysis model was constructed using literature review and expert clinical judgement. This assessed the expected costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) of decision alternatives over a 10-year period. The model incorporated interventions including alternate PDE5-Is, intracorporal injections (ICI) with alprostadil or trimix (alprostadil, phentolamine, and papaverine), and inflatable penile prosthesis placement (IPP) and included respective risks of failure, subsequent interventions, and other complications (including priapism risk). Average model QALY estimates obtained from the literature were as follows: ED =0.56, successful alternate PDE5-I =0.70, successful ICI =0.70, and successful IPP =0.78. Cost data were calculated from a high-volume academic center and published manufacturer data.

resultsOver the 10-year period, IPP placement was the most cost-effective management option per preserved QALY (QALY =7.82, cost =$22,009/10 years) as compared to ICI alprostadil (QALY =8.51, cost =$62,890/10 years), ICI trimix (QALY =8.47, cost =$48,617/10 years) and alternate PDE5-I (QALY =7.73, $52,883/10 years).

conclusionsUsing expert opinion and published utility, cost, and complication data in a decision analysis, we demonstrated that IPP placement is the most cost-effective ED intervention following failed initial PDE5-I over a 10-year period as compared to alternate treatment options. Such cost-effectiveness outcomes may be used in ED management counseling.

Indexed as

cost and cost analysisErectile dysfunction (ED)penile prosthesis

Identifiers

PMID31555563
PMCPMC6732088
OpenAlexW2924558314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.