ArticleRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2024
Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors for erectile function rehabilitation in patients undergoing nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: a scoping review.
Article in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 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.
- Health literacy correlates, barriers, and adherence in post-prostatectomy sexual rehabilitation: cross-sectional findings from China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Prescription Trends and the Role of Cardiologists in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review on the efficacy of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE-5Is) in rehabilitating erectile function in patients undergoing cavernous nerve sparing radical prostatectomy (NSRP).
methodsThe databases used were MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS and Web of Science. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses on the subject were included until March 5, 2024, with no language restrictions. Publications that did not address any of the aforementioned relationships were excluded. The data was organized into tables for descriptive analysis. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the ROBIS tool.
resultsEight studies were selected and all concluded that the use of PDE-5Is is effective in penile rehabilitation. Only one of the reviews found that use for more than six months was superior to short-term use, and another concluded that daily use was superior to on-demand use. In addition, the articles identified more adverse effects in the experimental group compared to the control group, but without compromising therapeutic adherence. Six of the studies were classified as low risk of bias, while the other two had uncertain risk.
conclusionPDE-5Is are effective in restoring erectile function in patients undergoing NSRP, especially when used regularly and over the long term, and follow-up is not hampered by adverse effects. However, due to the scarcity of data, new studies should be carried out to determine the best form of use of these drugs.
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.