ArticleSexual medicine2024
A real-world pilot study assessing treatment satisfaction with avanafil in patients with erectile dysfunction.
Article in Sexual medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Narrative Review of Independent Treatment Methods for ED: Assessment of the Effectiveness of Diet, Supplements, Pharmacotherapy, and Physiotherapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Avanafil use in patients with erectile dysfunction and co-morbidities: Clinical insights from multiple aetiologies - A case series.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Avanafil is a second-generation phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor, and offers a rapid onset of action (15 minutes). Its real-world data, including treatment satisfaction, are still lacking. Aim: The study sought to investigate the treatment outcomes of avanafil and the factors impacting treatment satisfaction in a real-world setting. Methods: Between November 2021 and February 2023, erectile dysfunction (ED) patients prescribed avanafil were consecutively enrolled in this phase 4, open-label, cross-sectional, observational study. At each follow-up visit (4-week intervals), participants completed a questionnaire for assessing the use and treatment-emergent adverse events of avanafil, ED severity, and treatment satisfaction. Outcomes: The outcome measures included the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM), and Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction. Results: Among 234 patients enrolled, 112 (47.9%) patients had follow-up visits and answered the questionnaire. Treatment with avanafil significantly improved the mean SHIM total score from 10.2 ± 5.6 at baseline to 17.5 ± 6.2 ( Clinical Implications: This study identifies the factors associated with treatment satisfaction of avanafil, which may ultimately lead to better treatment outcomes. Strengths and Limitations: This is the first study to provide real-world evidence of avanafil for ED treatment, and validated questionnaires were used to assess erectile function and treatment satisfaction. However, the limitations of this study include single-center observational study design, small sample size, and short-term follow-up. Conclusion: Avanafil is an effective treatment for ED, and satisfaction rate is high in an outpatient setting. The awareness of identified factors related to patient satisfaction may improve treatment outcomes.
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.