SynthesisInternational journal of impotence research2024
Surgical and minimally invasive treatment of ischaemic and non-ischaemic priapism: a systematic review by the EAU Sexual and Reproductive Health Guidelines panel.
Synthesis in International journal of impotence research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical illustrative review of the treatment of ischaemic priapism.International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
- Current evidence on the management of ischaemic priapism post-shunting: a narrative review.International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
- Response to Comment on Trends and outcomes of hospitalized patients with priapism in Germany: results from the GRAND study.International journal of impotence research · 2026Article
- Trends and outcomes of hospitalized patients with priapism in Germany: results from the GRAND study.International journal of impotence research · 2026Article
- Super-selective arterial embolization in the therapy of non-ischemic priapism-a single-center study and literature review.CVIR endovascular · 2026Article
- An update on mechanisms and treatment options for priapism.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- Evaluating the management trends for priapism and assessing the risk of priapism after in-office intracavernosal injections: a cross-sectional analysis.International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Comparative efficacy of gelatin sponge, microcoils, and nbca in arterial gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Priapism Presentations in a Saudi Arabian Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Care Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 50th year anniversary of penile implants: an ongoing worldwide triumph.International journal of impotence research · 2023Article
- Priapism at Diagnosis of Pediatric Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Data Derived from a Large Cohort of Children and Teenagers and a Narrative Review on Priapism Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 20 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical treatments for ischemic priapism (IP) include shunts or penile implants. Non-ischemic priapism (NIP) is usually the result of penile/perineal trauma causing an arterial fistula and embolisation may be required. We conducted a systematic review on behalf of the EAU Sexual and Reproductive health Guidelines panel to analyse the available evidence on efficacy and safety of surgical modalities for IP and NIP. Outcomes were priapism resolution, sexual function and adverse events following surgery. Overall, 63 studies (n = 923) met inclusion criteria up to September 2021. For IP (n = 702), surgery comprised distal (n = 274), proximal shunts (n = 209) and penile prostheses (n = 194). Resolution occurred in 18.7-100% for distal, 5.7-100% for proximal shunts and 100% for penile prostheses. Potency rate was 20-100% for distal, 11.1-77.2% for proximal shunts, and 26.3-100% for penile prostheses, respectively. Patient satisfaction was 60-100% following penile prostheses implantation. Complications were 0-42.5% for shunts and 0-13.6% for IPP. For NIP (n = 221), embolisation success was 85.7-100% and potency 80-100%. The majority of studies were retrospective cohort studies. Risk of bias was high. Overall, surgical shunts have acceptable success rates in IP. Proximal/venous shunts should be abandoned due to morbidity/ED rates. In IP > 48 h, best outcomes are seen with penile prostheses implantation. Embolisation is the mainstay technique for NIP with high resolution rates and adequate erectile function.
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.