Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37305636›Full record

ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2023

Comparison of satisfaction with penile prosthesis implantation in patients with prostate cancer radiation therapy versus radical prostatectomy.

Justin P Mehr, Kyle A Blum, Travis Green, Skyler Howell, Stephen Palasi, Andrew T Sullivan, Benjamin Kim, Christopher Kannady, Run Wang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Justin P MehrDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Kyle A BlumDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Travis GreenDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Skyler HowellDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Stephen PalasiDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Andrew T SullivanDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Benjamin KimDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Christopher KannadyDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Run WangDepartment of Surgery, Division of Urology, McGovern Medical School at UTHealth - Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
The University of Texas Health Science Center · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Penile prosthesis surgery (PPS) is a commonly used treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED), either as first-line therapy or in cases refractory to other treatment options. In patients with a urologic malignancy such as prostate cancer, surgical interventions like radical prostatectomy (RP) as well as non-surgical treatments such as radiation therapy can all induce ED. PPS as a treatment for ED has high satisfaction rates in the general population. Our aim was to compare sexual satisfaction in patients with prosthesis implantation for ED following RP versus ED following radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Methods: A retrospective chart review from our institutional database was conducted to identify patients who underwent PPS at our institution from 2011 to 2021. Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire data at least 6 months from implant operative date available was required for inclusion. Eligible patients were placed in one of two groups depending on etiology of ED-following RP or prostate cancer radiation therapy. To prevent crossover confounding; patients with history of pelvic radiation were excluded from the RP group and patients with history of RP were excluded from the radiation group. Data were obtained from 51 patients in the RP group and 32 patients in the radiation therapy group. Mean EDITS scores and additional survey questions were compared between the radiation and RP groups. Results: There was a significant difference in mean survey responses for 8 of the 11 questions in the EDITS questionnaire between the RP group and the radiation group. Additional survey questions administered also found RP patients reported significantly higher rate of satisfaction with size of penis post-operatively versus the radiation group. Conclusions: These preliminary findings, while requiring large-scale follow-up, suggest that there is greater sexual satisfaction and penile prosthesis device satisfaction in patients undergoing IPP placement following RP versus radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Use of validated questionnaires should continue to be utilized in quantifying device and sexual satisfaction following PPS.

Indexed as

Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS)Inflatable penile prosthesisprostate cancerradiation therapyradical prostatectomy (RP)

Identifiers

PMID37305636
PMCPMC10251085
OpenAlexW4364322818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.