SynthesisInternational urology and nephrology2026
Biomarkers of endothelial damage in erectile dysfunction based on preclinical studies: a systematic review.
Synthesis in International urology and nephrology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the relationship between biomarkers and endothelial damage in animal models of experimentally induced erectile dysfunction. The biomarkers with the most robust evidence could be tested in future in human patients to assess their clinical significance in the diagnosis and follow-up of ED patients.
methodsThis systematic review was conducted according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and following the PRISMA Statement. We designed a search strategy in MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception to the present. We assessed the risk of bias based on the SYRCLE tool for preclinical trials.
results1208 animals were included in 34 studies. A total of 12 biomarkers were reviewed. Six markers showed decreased expression: eNOS in 18 studies (p < 0.05), in 9 studies (p < 0.01), and one study (p > 0.05); VEGF in 5 studies (p < 0.05) and one study (p < 0.01); nNOS in 1 study (p < 0.01) and in 1 study (p < 0.05); aSMA in 2 studies (p < 0.05); LncRNA in 1 study (p < 0.05); Hebp1 in 1 study (p < 0.001). Six markers showed increased expression: FACL-4, PACS-2, and IP3R1 in 1 study (p < 0.01, respectively); endocan in 1 study (p < 0.05); endothelial microparticles and endothelial progenitor cells in 1 study (p < 0.05, respectively). The six markers with decreased expression showed more than a 50% reduction compared to the control group. The six markers that showed increased expression demonstrated an increase of more than 50% compared to their respective comparison group. Selection, performance, and detection biases were identified in 100% of the studies.
conclusioneNOS; VEGF; nNOS; aSMA; LncRNA; and Hebp1 showed decreased expression in the presence of endothelial damage, while FACL-4; PACS-2; IP3R1; endocan; endothelial microparticles; and endothelial progenitor cells showed an increase under the same conditions. These could become markers with implications for clinical trials and the development of new targeted treatments for ED.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.