Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31793445›Full record

ReviewAsian journal of andrology

Penile prosthesis implant in the special populations: diabetics, neurogenic conditions, fibrotic cases, concurrent urinary continence surgery, and salvage implants.

Eric Chung

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Asian journal of andrology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Top ten surgical tricks-penile prosthesis with corporal fibrosis.International journal of impotence research · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A Pragmatic Approach to Sexual Health in Movement Disorders.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Technological advances in penile implants: past, present, future.International journal of impotence research · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Neurogenic Erectile Dysfunction. Where Do We Stand?Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Eric ChungAndroUrology Centre, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Penile prosthesis implant (PPI) remains an effective and safe treatment option for men with erectile dysfunction (ED). However, PPI surgery can be associated with a higher risk of complications in certain populations. This article provides a critical review of relevant publications pertaining to PPI in men with diabetes, significant corporal fibrosis, spinal cord injury, concurrent continence surgery, and complex salvage cases. The discussion of each category of special populations includes a brief review of the surgical challenges and a practical action-based set of recommendations. While specific patient populations posed considerable challenges in PPI surgery, strict pre- and postoperative management coupled with safe surgical practice is a prerequisite to achieving excellent clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction rate.

Indexed as

Penile ImplantationDiabetes ComplicationsDiabetes MellitusErectile DysfunctionHumansMalePenile IndurationPenile ProsthesisPriapismProsthesis-Related InfectionsSalvage TherapySpinal Cord InjuriesSuburethral SlingsSurgical Wound InfectionUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Sphincter, Artificialcontinence surgerydiabeteserectile dysfunctionpenile prosthesis implantPeyronie's diseasepriapismsalvage surgeryspinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID31793445
PMCPMC6958981
OpenAlexW2993333169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.