Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31735700›Full record

ReviewSexual medicine reviews2020

The Basic Physics of Waves, Soundwaves, and Shockwaves for Erectile Dysfunction.

Jonathan Elliott Katz, Raul Ivan Clavijo, Paul Rizk, Ranjith Ramasamy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sexual medicine reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Low-intensity shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Assessment of Noise Exposure in United States Urban Public Parks: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Survey of the quality and origins of websites on penile low-intensity shockwave therapy in Canada.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jonathan Elliott KatzDepartment of Urology, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.
Raul Ivan ClavijoDepartment of Urology, University of California at Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Paul RizkDepartment of Urology, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.
Ranjith RamasamyDepartment of Urology, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA. Electronic address: ramasamy@miami.edu.

Funding

Miami Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR002736 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI CARRASQUILLO, OLVEEN, KOBETZ, ERIN N · 2018 to 2022
$23.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002736
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOver the past decade, low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (Li-ESWT) has emerged as a treatment modality for erectile dysfunction (ED). To better appreciate the differences between the various devices for the treatment of ED, it is imperative for physicians to understand the underlying physics of the different shockwave generators.

aimIn this article, we explain the physics of shockwaves by establishing a foundation regarding the basics of waves, specifically soundwaves. We also describe the different shockwave generators available and assess their potential clinical utility.

methodsWe reviewed basic principles of wave propagation, randomized controlled trials investigating Li-ESWT for ED and other medical diseases, and individual industry shockwave generator websites, in order to describe the basic physics underlying Li-ESWT.

main outcome measureWe primarily aimed to describe the physics underlying shockwave generators and to provide a framework for understanding the relevant subtypes and adjustable parameters.

resultsA wave is a disturbance in a medium that transports energy without permanently transporting matter. In shockwaves, a soundwave is generated with a speed faster than the local speed of sound. Shockwaves are classically generated by three different types of energy sources: electrohydraulic, electromagnetic, or piezoelectric, which all create a shockwave through the conversion of electric potential energy to mechanical energy. Importantly, radial pressure waves do not behave the same as conventional shockwaves and are more like "ordinary" sound waves in that they achieve a significantly lower peak pressure, a slower rise time, and propagate outwards without a focal point. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Li-ESWT is not currently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is considered investigational in the United States. However, it is currently available to patients under clinical trial protocols and it is important to understand the basic physics of shockwaves to understand the differences between the different shockwave devices. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS: This is a comprehensive review of the physics underlying Li-ESWT but only tangentially explores the biological impact of shockwaves.

conclusionPhysicians currently using or those contemplating purchasing a Li-ESWT device should understand the basic physics underlying the device, as well as which treatment protocols were used to demonstrate clinical efficacy in treating ED. Katz JE, Clavijo RI, Rizk P, et al. The Basic Physics of Waves, Soundwaves, and Shockwaves for Erectile Dysfunction. Sex Med Rev 2020;8:100-105.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Shockwave TherapyErectile DysfunctionHumansMaleSoundErectile DysfunctionExtracorporeal Shockwave TherapyLow-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (Li-ESWT)

Identifiers

PMID31735700
PMCPMC6934904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.