Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37798540›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2024

Surgical treatment of premature ejaculation: a narrative review.

Muslim Dogan Deger, Murat Gül, Ege Can Serefoglu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muslim Dogan DegerDepartment of Urology, Tekirdag City Hospital, Tekirdag, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5095-7770
Murat GülDepartment of Urology, Selcuk University School of Medicine, Konya, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6657-6227
Ege Can SerefogluDepartment of Urology, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey. egecanserefoglu@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2530-7012
Biruni University · TRSelçuk University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recurrence after drug cessation is the biggest drawback of medical premature ejaculation (PE) treatments. Although these treatments are demonstrated to be safe and effective, most of the PE patients are interested in a more permanent solution. Despite the fact that currently available guidelines do not recommend surgical treatment for PE, some surgical interventions have been commonly performed for many years, especially in the Asian countries. The main purpose of these surgical treatments is to decrease the sensitivity of the glans penis. However, they are associated with irreversible complications such as penile deformity, sensory loss and erectile dysfunction. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of various surgical interventions introduced for the treatment of PE. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science have been utilized to search articles about glans penis augmentation and penile dorsal nerve interventions. A total of 11 articles were included, three articles excluded because they were in non-English languages. Glans penis augmentation offered a less invasive treatment that avoids severe side effects but requires retreatment in time. Selective dorsal neurectomy provided a more invasive but curative treatment alternative. However, more clinical data are necessary before surgical treatment options can be recommended to patients with PE.

Indexed as

PenisPremature EjaculationEjaculationHumansMaleTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID37798540
OpenAlexW4387374751

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.