ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2021
Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy for male chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of the new P100 extracorporeal shock wave therapy device in the treatment of type IIIB chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a sham treatment controlled, prospective clinical trial.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Trial
- Narrative review: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for pain management in musculoskeletal rehabilitation: Mechanisms, clinical applications, and safety.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Review
- Male fertility as an integral reflection of metabolic, endocrine, and musculoskeletal health.Rheumatology international · 2026Review
- Effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on pain and pelvic floor function in women with pelvic floor myofascial pain: a retrospective cohort analysis.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Optimizing the Use of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for CP/CPPS: A Modality-Based Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Focused and Radial Devices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Treatment of prostatitis with low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT).International urology and nephrology · 2023Review
- The methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome using AMSTAR2.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in association with bromelain and escin for the management of patients affected by chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.Biomedical reports · 2023Article
- Review
- Metabolomics Analysis Reveals the Differential Metabolites and Establishes the Therapeutic Effect Prediction Nomogram Among CP/CPPS Patients Who Respond or Do Not Respond to LiST.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA systematic review of the evidence was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (LI-ESWT) for patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS).
methodsA comprehensive search was undertaken of the Cochrane Register, PubMed, and Embase databases for controlled trials that evaluated patients with CPPS who were treated with LI-ESWT and that were published before August 2019. The National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) was the most frequently used tool to evaluate the treatment efficacy of LI-ESWT. The NIH-CPSI comprises subscales for pain [using a visual analog scale (VAS)], urinary function, and quality of life (QoL).
resultsSix studies analyzing 317 patients were published from 2009 to 2019. The overall meta-analysis of the data indicated that LI-ESWT demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of CPPS at 12 weeks [risk difference (RD): 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-0.63; P<0.00001]. The studies were divided into 3 groups based on time after LI-ESWT (1, 12, and 24 weeks) and were compared in total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, VAS scores, and urinary symptoms. The total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, VAS scores, and urinary symptom scores improved significantly at 12 weeks after LI-ESWT (P<0.05), but not at 1 week or 24 weeks (P>0.05).
conclusionsBased on these studies, LI-ESWT may transiently improve the total NIH-CPSI scores, QoL, pain scores, and urinary symptom scores of patients with CPPS. Future research may elucidate the mechanisms underlying the effects of LI-ESWT on CPPS. Well-designed and long-term multicenter randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to estimate the real potential and ultimate use of these devices in patients with CPPS.
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.