ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2026
Infection rates in primary inflatable penile prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic-coated versus non-coated devices.
Review 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our aim was to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis comparing primary inflatable penile prosthesis with and without antibiotic coverage, determining infection rates and identifying the most effective prophylaxis to prevent infectious complications. We conducted a systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and LILACS databases. The search and selection process followed PRISMA guidelines, and the selected studies were evaluated for quality using the ROBINS-I tool. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to filter the results, and a meta-analysis was later performed using the R Statistical Software. After removing duplicate studies, 50 studies were selected for full-text analysis, and 29 were included for further examination. Of those, 11 observational studies comprising 102,572 patients who underwent primary penile prosthesis implantation, with or without antibiotic-coated or non-coated prostheses, were included in the meta-analysis. Our analysis revealed a significant decline in infection rates among those using coated prostheses (HR = 0.38; CI 0.28 to 0.51; p < 0.01; I
Identifiers
42477170What 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.