Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37853240›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2024

A contemporary review of the treatments and challenges associated with penile rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy including a proposed optimal approach.

Megan Bock, Ramzy T Burns, Thairo A Pereira, Helen L Bernie

Open access · greenAbstract 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Megan BockDepartment of Urology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Ramzy T BurnsDepartment of Urology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA. Rburns8@iu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-6610-4560
Thairo A PereiraDepartment of Urology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Helen L BernieDepartment of Urology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3665-6074
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USIndiana University Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies affecting men worldwide. Despite advancements in understanding prostate anatomy and minimally invasive approaches to surgical treatment, surgery can have significant adverse effects on sexual function. Penile rehabilitation strategies have emerged as a promising approach to mitigate the impact of prostate cancer treatments on erectile function and improve quality of life. Several methods have been employed for penile rehabilitation, including pharmacotherapy, vacuum erection devices, intracavernous injections, and emerging novel techniques. Yet, there is no consensus on the exact programs or timing of initiation that should be utilized for optimal recovery after surgery. This review discusses various rehabilitation protocols and long-term outcomes and explores the cost-effectiveness of different interventions. Additionally, this review discusses the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to penile rehabilitation which includes patient education, counseling, and the selection of an appropriate rehabilitation strategy tailored to each individual's needs and preferences. Continued research and collaboration among healthcare professionals are essential to refine rehabilitation approaches and ensure optimal outcomes for patients with prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Erectile DysfunctionProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMalePenile ErectionPenisQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID37853240
OpenAlexW4387765332

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.