Evidence Hub

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials of “on‑demand” use of tramadol vs “on‑demand” use of paroxetine in the management of patients with premature ejaculation

Haotian Tan, Zhongbao Zhou, Yuanshan Cui, Fan Feng, Yong Zhang

International Journal of Clinical Practice, 2021

663 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the effect of "on-demand" use of tramadol vs "on-demand" use of paroxetine in the management of patients with premature ejaculation (PE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases and original references of the included articles was performed. PRISMA checklist was followed. The Cochrane Handbook was used to evaluate the quality of the included research. RESULTS: A total of seven articles including 663 patients were studied. The results indicated that patients who received on-demand therapy of tramadol or paroxetine showed significant improvement compared with those treated with placebo, as assessed by intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) (P < .00001 and P = .02, respectively) and sexual satisfaction score (P < .00001 and P < .00001, respectively). Furthermore, Patients who were treated with on-demand tramadol had a better effect than those treated with on-demand paroxetine in respect of IELT (P = .01) and sexual satisfaction score (P = .03). With regard to safety, the most common adverse event for the tramadol group was sleep disturbance and the most common adverse event for the paroxetine group was a headache. No serious adverse event was observed in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, on-demand therapy of tramadol or paroxetine showed a better improvements in IELT and sexual satisfaction scores. Besides, on-demand tramadol revealed a better effect than on-demand paroxetine for patients…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 663 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free