Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35536499›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2022

Review of Ischemic and Non-ischemic Priapism.

Mark G Biebel, Martin S Gross, Ricardo Munarriz

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Top ten surgical tricks-penile prosthesis with corporal fibrosis.International journal of impotence research · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Artificial Intelligence Modeling and Priapism.Current urology reports · 2024
    Review
  8. Penile implants in low flow priapism.International journal of impotence research · 2023
    Review
  9. A case report of transmural rectosigmoid ischemia in an elderly patient.International journal of surgery case reports · 2023
    Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Mark G BiebelBoston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, 725 Albany street, suite 3B, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Martin S GrossDartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, 03756, USA.
Ricardo MunarrizBoston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, 725 Albany street, suite 3B, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. munarriz@bu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewPriapism is a rare condition that has different presentations, etiologies, pathophysiology, and treatment algorithms. It can be associated with significant patient distress and sexual dysfunction. We aim to examine the most up-to-date literature and guidelines in the management of this condition. RECENT

findingsPriapism is a challenging condition to manage for urologists, since the etiology is often multi-factorial and the suggested treatment algorithms are based on small studies and expert anecdotal experience, perhaps due to the rarity of the disorder. Ischemic priapism of less than 24 h can be managed non-surgically in most cases with excellent results. Ischemic priapism of more than 36 h is frequently associated with permanent erectile dysfunction. Management of prolonged priapism with penile shunting still may result in poor erectile function, so penile prosthesis can be discussed in these scenarios.

Indexed as

Erectile DysfunctionPenile ProsthesisPriapismHumansMalePenile ErectionPenisCorporal fibrosisErectile dysfunctionPriapismProsthesisShuntSickle cell

Identifiers

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.