ArticleCVIR endovascular2026
Endovascular therapy for erectile dysfunction: insights from more than 1000 treatments.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Correction: Endovascular therapy for erectile dysfunction: insights from more than 1000 treatments.CVIR endovascular · 2026Article
- Challenging the paradigm: what is vasculogenic erectile dysfunction?International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo report effectiveness and patient-reported satisfaction after endovascular treatment of vasculogenic erectile dysfunction (ED) in a large registry cohort.
methodsErectile function was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaires. Endovascular treatments included revascularization of arterial obstruction and/or venous leak embolization. Safety endpoints included the absence of device- or procedure-related major adverse events. Patient satisfaction was measured at 6 weeks using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) questionnaire.
resultsAccording to the SwissPower registry, 1032 endovascular procedures were performed on 776 patients, thereof 524 patients received at least one arterial revascularization, and 188 men underwent at least one venous embolization. Of note, 64 patients underwent both venous plus arterial procedures during the study period. Among patients with available follow-up IIEF-6 data, a ≥ 4-point improvement was observed in 175/402 men (44%) after arterial revascularization at 30 months, in 62/140 men (44%) after venous leak embolization at 9 months, and in 28/54 men (52%) after combined arterial plus venous interventions at 21 months. According to PGI-I, patients reported improved erectile function after arterial revascularization in 61% (226/369), venous leak embolization in 72% (102/142), and combined arterial plus venous interventions in 68% (38/56). Overall, 400/554 men (72.2%) reported that they would undergo the procedure again: 67.4% after arterial intervention, 78.7% after venous embolization, and 87.5% after combined arterial plus venous interventions.
conclusionsIn this large registry cohort, endovascular treatment for vasculogenic erectile dysfunction was associated with clinically meaningful improvement of erectile function in the majority of patients.
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.