Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38205393›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology

Risk and benefits of penile length preservation techniques during penile prosthesis implantation: a systematic review by the young academic urologists sexual and reproductive health working group.

Marco Falcone, Mirko Preto, Afonso Ribeiro Morgado, Ioannis Sokolakis, Selçuk Sarıkaya, Marco Capece, Paolo Capogrosso, Celeste Manfredi, Georgios Tsampoukas, Giorgio Russo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 100% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors at 9 institutions in 5 countries.

Marco FalconeDepartment of Urology, A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Molinette Hospital, Turin, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1101-892X
Mirko PretoDepartment of Urology, A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Molinette Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Afonso Ribeiro MorgadoDepartment of Urology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João, Porto, Portugal.
Ioannis SokolakisDepartment of Urology, Martha-Maria Hospital Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany.
Selçuk SarıkayaDepartment of Urology, Gülhane Research and Training Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Ankara, Turkey.
Marco CapeceDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive Sciences and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Paolo CapogrossoDepartment of Urology, ASST-Sette Laghi, Circolo & Fondazione Macchi Hospital, University of Insurbria, Varese, Italy.
Celeste ManfrediUnit of Urology, Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Georgios TsampoukasDepartment of Urology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, London, UK.
Giorgio RussoDepartment of Urology, Vittorio Emanuele II, University of Catania, Urology, Catania, Italy.
Fondazione Ricerca Molinette · ITHospital de São João · PTMartha-Maria Hospital · DEOspedale di Circolo e Fondazione Macchi · ITPrincess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust · GBSağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi · TRUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Catania · ITUniversity of Naples Federico II · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Penile shortening, frequently resulting from end-stage Peyronie's disease (PD), has a negative impact on patients' sexual activity and overall quality of life, especially when accompanied by Erectile dysfunction (ED). Various surgical techniques have been described to manage concomitant ED and penile shortening through penile prosthesis (PP) implantation. Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and risks of different penile length preservation techniques during PP implantation. Design: A systematic review of the available literature on the use of penile length preservation maneuvers in conjunction with PP implantation was conducted. Data sources and methods: For this systematic review, three databases (Medline, Embase and Cochrane) and clinical trial.gov were queried for relevant publications from 1 January 1990 to 1 September 2022. The review process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results: The qualitative analysis included 15 relevant articles involving 1186 adult patients who underwent penile length preservation techniques during PP implantation. Penile lengthening of 1-7 cm was reported. Overall, postoperative complications were described in up to 21.7% of cases. Only five studies reported functional outcomes, showing a significant improvement in postoperative period based on the administered questionnaire (e.g. IIEF - International Index of Erectile Function, EDITS - Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction). Conclusion: Penile length preservation procedures appear to offer a viable option for managing acquired penile shortening, particularly in cases of PD. However, they are associated with a significant risk of complications. Proper patient selection, thorough discussion of risks and benefits, and referral to high-volume centers are mandatory to achieve optimal outcomes and minimizing complications. Trial registration: PROSPERO database registration CRD42022360758.

Indexed as

erectile dysfunctionpenile lengtheningpenile prosthesisPeyronie’s diseasesliding techniquesurgical outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38205393
PMCPMC10775725
OpenAlexW4390670727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.