Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10082071›Full record

ReviewDrug safety1999

Comparative tolerability and efficacy of treatments for impotence.

W Meinhardt, R F Kropman, P Vermeij

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Possible hemodynamic pathways of intraurethral prostaglandin-E1 (MUSE).International journal of impotence research · 2004
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

W MeinhardtDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam. wmeinh@NKI.NL
R F Kropman
P Vermeij
Leiden University · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern pharmacological treatment of impotence is determined by the presenting symptoms. Since this involves symptomatology with a heterogenous aetiology, many different drugs are involved in the treatment of impotence. Drugs used for libido and arousal problems include testosterone, yohimbine, trazodone and apomorphine. Since patient self-assessment is the only parameter that can be used to measure the result of treatment and positive results are seldom affirmed, no positive benefit of these agents can be assumed at present. Oral medications for erectile dysfunction include yohimbine, trazodone, apomorphine, phentolamine, arginine and sildenafil. Of these drugs, sildenafil has been the most systematically studied for effectiveness, but long term safety data await the results of post-marketing surveillance. Of the ejaculation disorder therapies, treatments for premature ejaculation are the best studied. Favourable results have been obtained with clomipramine, paroxetine and fluoxetine. The safety of these medications has been assessed through their long term use in psychiatry. Intracavernous self-injections for erectile disorders are performed using a variety of drugs and drug mixtures. Only alprostadil and the combination of papaverine with phentolamine are widely used. Alprostadil is very well tolerated; however, penile pain is a serious problem in a significant proportion of patients. Papaverine in combination with phentolamine is effective, but penile fibrosis and priapism occur more often than with the use of alprostadil. Several new developments in this area are currently under way. Alternative routes for medication for erectile dysfunction include ointments and patches to the penile skin and the glans. Only transurethral alprostadil, 'MUSE' (medicated urethral system for erection) has been shown to be effective in large trials. Long term safety still has to be demonstrated, but the 1-year safety profile is encouraging. In general, the end points of impotence treatment studies are very diverse so efficacy data can only be assessed in comparative studies. However, long term comparison studies have not been performed. Safety demands must be set very high for this type of treatment since the disorders being treated present no threat to the patient's health.

Indexed as

AphrodisiacsEjaculationErectile DysfunctionHumansLibidoMalePenile ErectionPhosphodiesterase InhibitorsVasodilator AgentsAphrodisiacsPhosphodiesterase InhibitorsVasodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID10082071
OpenAlexW2003453500

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.