ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2025
Sexual functioning after penile cancer surgery: comparison between surgical approaches in a large patient cohort.
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Organ preservation or radical surgery? Modern surgical concepts within the complex interplay between function and oncology].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Very few studies examine sexuality after penile cancer (PeCa) surgery and/or evaluate predictors of sexual satisfaction. Since 2016, primary PeCa patients at our institute routinely received the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-15) questionnaire: preoperatively (baseline) and 3-, 6-, 12- and 24-months postoperatively. We included patients who were surgically treated at our institute and completed the baseline and ≥1 follow-up questionnaire. Sexually active patients were divided into groups: wide local excision (WLE), glansectomy, partial penectomy and total penectomy with perineal urethrostomy. Linear mixed effects models were used for longitudinal analyses with repeated measures to examine predictors of overall sexual satisfaction. 647 patients with (suspected) PeCa were evaluated and received questionnaires. 543 (83.9%) returned the questionnaires. 242 were suitable for analysis. Preoperatively, only 55/242 (22.7%) were sexually active. Postoperatively, the number of sexually active patients increased for WLE (30.8% at baseline, 43.5% at two-year follow-up) and glansectomy (35.0% to 40.0%, both p < 0.001). Sexual satisfaction was below the level of healthy men in all patients, both pre- and postoperatively. Longer follow-up time, younger age, and penile-sparing surgeries were predictors for better sexual satisfaction. Our findings underscore the importance of considering penile-sparing surgical approaches in the treatment of PeCa when oncologically feasible. The significant improvements in sexual activity and sexual satisfaction following WLE and glansectomy support this approach. However, the overall sexual satisfaction after all PeCa surgery remains below the level of the healthy men, both pre- and post-operative, emphasizing the importance of guidance throughout the treatment trajectory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40275007What 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.