Evidence Hub

Generating comprehensive comparative evidence on various interventions for penile rehabilitation in patients with erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Dechao Feng, Sheng-Zhuo Liu, Yu-Bo Yang, Yun-Jin Bai, Dengxiong Li, P. Han, Wu-Ran Wei

Translational Andrology and Urology, 2020

3,500 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We aim to present a comprehensive comparison of various treatments in the management of penile recovery after radical prostatectomy (RP) and provide recommendations for future research. METHODS: Literature search of electronic databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycInfo, and Web of Science, and manual retrieval were conducted from inception through March 2020. "Erectile dysfunction" and "prostatectomy" were used as the Mesh terms. The patients, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design (PICOS) approach were used to define study eligibility. Two authors independently selected studies, evaluated the methodological quality, and extracted data using Cochrane Collaboration's tools. The data analysis was completed by STATA version 14.2. RESULTS: A total of 24 studies with 3,500 patients were incorporated in the final analysis after screening 6,131 records. Our findings indicated that vacuum constriction devices (VCD) ranked 1st which meant that patients in VCD group had the best effect regarding mean IIEF scores within 3 months after RP, and no significant difference was observed between VCD and VCD with 20 mg/day tadalafil (V20DT) (MD: 5.44; 95% CI: -0.81 to 11.69). VCD and 50 mg/day sildenafil (VC50DS) showed superiority over 50 mg/day sildenafil (50DS) (MD: 3.75; 95% CI: 2.74-4.76) and intraurethral alprostadil 125-250 µg (MD: 3.05; 95% CI: 0.38 to 5.72), respectively. Moreover, V20DT showed significant superiority over the other…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 3,500 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