ReviewSexual medicine2024
Impact of cardiac rehabilitation on erectile dysfunction in cardiovascular patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Sexual medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The causal effect of family history of cardiovascular disease on erectile dysfunction: a randomized clinical study and Mendelian randomization study.Asian journal of andrology · 2026Article
- Erectile dysfunction and sexual health counselling after myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2026Article
- The relationship between erectile dysfunction and blood urea nitrogen/creatinine and blood urea nitrogen/albumin ratios: A case-control study.Central European journal of urology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and erectile dysfunction (ED) frequently co-occur, significantly affecting the quality of life of individuals. Aim: To assess the impact of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) on ED in patients with CVD through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: This study analyzed randomized controlled trials and other studies comparing CR with usual care for adult males (≥18 years) with any cardiac disease. Literature searches were extensive, and the risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Data from 6 studies involving 668 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Outcomes: The primary outcome was the improvement in ED, as measured with the International Index of Erectile Function. Results: A statistically significant improvement in erectile function was observed across 6 studies, with a Morris dppc2 effect size of 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17-0.59). Despite initial high heterogeneity ( Clinical Translation: CR has a modest but statistically significant impact on improving ED in patients with CVD, indicating its potential positive contribution to the quality of life of this group. Strengths and Limitations: The study's strengths include a comprehensive literature search and a rigorous methodological approach. Limitations involve high heterogeneity among studies and a low level of evidence due to small sample sizes and study quality; however, the source of heterogeneity was identified and mitigated following risk-of-bias assessment. Conclusion: The results suggest that CR has a statistically significant but modest impact on improving ED in patients with CVD. Clinicians should consider the integration of CR into the clinical management of these individuals. This study underscores the potential for CR to contribute positively to the quality of life for patients with CVD by addressing associated ED (PROSPERO: CRD42022374625).
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.