ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2026
Oral suspension versus tablet sildenafil for erectile dysfunction: a prospective multicenter comparative study on patient satisfaction.
Article in International journal of impotence research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New formulations of sildenafil, such as oral suspension, may improve onset of action and patient acceptability. This prospective, non-randomized, multicenter observational study compared sildenafil oral suspension (SiSUS) and sildenafil tablets (SiTAB) in treatment-naïve men with erectile dysfunction (ED). Patients from four urology centers in Madrid selected either SiSUS (Bandol®, AspargoLabs Inc., NY, USA) or SiTAB after standardized counseling and received on-demand treatment for eight weeks. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction assessed by the Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire; secondary outcomes included changes in the International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function (IIEF-15) scores, latency to erection, and adverse events. A total of 133 patients completed the study (SiSUS: 64; SiTAB: 69). Both groups showed significant improvement in IIEF-15 scores (mean ΔIIEF-15: 17.41 ± 12.46 vs. 17.33 ± 15.02; p = 0.977). Median EDITS score was similar for both groups (77.27 vs. 61.36; p = 0.1312), with significantly greater satisfaction for SiSUS in those men ≤65 (77.27 vs 52.27, p = 0.0486). Median and interquartile ranges (IQR) times for latency to erection were shorter in the SiSUS group: 30 (30-45) vs. 60 (50-60) min; p < 0.0001). Adverse events were comparable (26.6 vs. 21.7%; p = 0.6547), with headache being the most frequent for both groups (12.5, vs 10.14%, p = 0.3244). Limitations include the observational, non-randomized design, short follow-up, and baseline differences between groups. Sildenafil oral suspension offers similar efficacy and safety to tablets, with a faster onset and higher satisfaction in younger patients, supporting its role in individualized ED management.
Identifiers
41957511What 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.