Dataset Information

Interventions to Treat Erectile Dysfunction and Premature Ejaculation: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Sexual dysfunction in men is common, and optimal treatment is complex. Although several systematic reviews concerning treatment approaches exist, a comprehensive overview without limitations concerning the population, interventions, or outcomes is lacking.

Aim

To conduct a "review of reviews" to compare the effectiveness of pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and combined interventions.

Methods

9 electronic databases, relevant journals, and reference lists up to July 2018 were searched. For each intervention, only the most recent and comprehensive meta-analysis or systematic review was included. The methodologic quality of the reviews was appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 tool.

Main outcome measure

Sexual functioning (via intravaginal ejaculatory latency time and international index of erectile function), sexual satisfaction, and adverse effects.

Results

30 systematic reviews were included. For premature ejaculation, several treatments, including oral pharmacotherapy (selective serotonin inhibitors, phosphodiesterase type 5 [PDE5] inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, and opioid analgesics), topical anesthetics, and combined drug and behavioral therapies demonstrated significant improvements of 1-5 minutes in the intravaginal ejaculatory latency time. Pharmacologic interventions (PDE5 inhibitors, penile injection, and testosterone), shockwave therapy, lifestyle modifications, and combined therapies (PDE5 inhibitors and psychological intervention) were effective in treating erectile dysfunction. Most pharmacologic therapies were associated with adverse effects.

Conclusions

There is suggestive evidence that pharmacologic interventions or combined therapies are more effective than non-pharmacologic interventions for treating sexual dysfunction in men; however, a range of treatment options should be presented to individual patients so they may consider the risks and benefits of treatments differently. Evidence related to behavioral and psychological interventions is insufficient compared with that related to drug trials, highlighting the necessity for larger and better randomized controlled trials. Ciocanel O, Power K, Eriksen A. Interventions to Treat Erectile Dysfunction and Premature Ejaculation: An Overview of Systematic Reviews. Sex Med 2019;7:251-269.

SUBMITTER: Ciocanel O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6728733 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Interventions to Treat Erectile Dysfunction and Premature Ejaculation: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Ciocanel Oana O Power Kevin K Eriksen Ann A

Sexual medicine 20190709 3

<h4>Introduction</h4>Sexual dysfunction in men is common, and optimal treatment is complex. Although several systematic reviews concerning treatment approaches exist, a comprehensive overview without limitations concerning the population, interventions, or outcomes is lacking.<h4>Aim</h4>To conduct a "review of reviews" to compare the effectiveness of pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and combined interventions.<h4>Methods</h4>9 electronic databases, relevant journals, and reference lists up to ...[more]

PMID: 31300388

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLow-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (LI-ESWT) may be a successful complementary treatment approach for erectile dysfunction (ED). In this study, we aimed to review and summarize the research evidence from systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) regarding the clinical effectiveness of LI-ESWT for ED.MethodsStudies on LI-ESWT for ED were searched using eight electronic databases from establishment of each database to 31 June 2021 with the language restrictions of Chinese and English. All articles were screened, and qualifying data were recorded based on the inclusion criteria. Methods including: the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2); the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS); the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development, and the Evaluation (GRADE) were used by two independent raters to assess methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality, and SR evidence of quality, respectively.ResultsEight SRs/MAs met all inclusion criteria. Seven reviews were rated as critically low on overall confidence and one review was low on confidence based on the AMSTAR-2 appraisal tool. While most PRISMA criteria were met, the major reporting flaws were in relation the financial statements not being included, along with no protocol registrations. Three SRs/MAs were classed as low risk regarding bias as measured by the ROBIS tool. Based on the GRADE method, only one SRs/MAs of high-quality evidence and seven SRs/MAs of moderate-quality evidence were found. The present research results supported LI-ESWT as a complementary therapy for ED patients, but the evidence should be considered carefully due to the methodological flaws identified.DiscussionOur results showed that LI-ESWT as an adjunctive therapy has benefits for ED patients. There were no obvious side effects, and the number of shockwave treatments and energy flux density (EFD) would affect the IIEF-EF, EHS and PSV scores. However, due to the limited sample size and the quality of reporting evidence, our conclusions may not be fully representative.

Project description:PurposeTo systematically summarize evidence from multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing medication nonadherence and to discern differences in effectiveness by intervention, patient, and study characteristics.SummaryMEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for papers published from January 2004 to February 2017. English-language SRs examining benefits of medication adherence interventions were eligible. Inclusion was limited to adult patients prescribed medication for 1 of the following disease conditions: diabetes and prediabetes, heart conditions, hypertension and prehypertension, stroke, and cognitive impairment. Non-disease-specific SRs that considered medication adherence interventions for older adults, adults with chronic illness, and adults with known medication adherence problems were also included. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. They then extracted key variables from eligible SRs, reconciling discrepancies via discussion. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used to assess SRs; those with scores below 8 were excluded. Conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness were extracted. Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was applied to assess evidence quality.ResultsOf 390 SRs, 25 met the inclusion criteria and assessed adherence as a primary outcome. Intervention types most consistently found to be effective were dose simplification, patient education, electronic reminders to patients, and reduced patient cost sharing or incentives. Of 50 conclusions drawn by the SRs, the underlying evidence was low or very low quality for 45 SRs.ConclusionDespite an abundance of primary studies and despite only examining high-quality SRs, the vast majority of primary studies supporting SR authors' conclusions were of low or very low quality. Nonetheless, health system leaders seeking to improve medication adherence should prioritize interventions that have been studied and found to be effective at improving patient adherence, including dose simplification, education, reminders, and financial incentives.

Project description:PURPOSE:To systematically evaluate and summarize evidence across multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing polypharmacy. SUMMARY:MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) were searched for SRs evaluating interventions addressing polypharmacy in adults published from January 2004 to February 2017. Two authors independently screened, appraised, and extracted information. SRs with Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scores below 8 were excluded. After extraction of relevant conclusions from each SR, evidence was summarized and conclusions compared. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess evidence quality. Six SRs met the inclusion criteria, 4 of which used meta-analytic pooling. Five SRs focused on older adults. Four were not restricted to any specific disease type, whereas 1 focused on proton pump inhibitors and another focused on patients with severe dementia. Care settings and measured outcomes varied widely. SRs examining the impact on patient-centered outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, patient satisfaction, and utilization, found inconsistent evidence regarding the benefit of polypharmacy interventions, but most concluded that interventions had either null or uncertain impact. Two SRs assessing medication appropriateness found very low-quality evidence of modest improvements with polypharmacy interventions. CONCLUSION:An overview of SRs of interventions to address polypharmacy found 6 recent and high-quality SRs, mostly focused on older adults, in which both process and outcome measures were used to evaluate interventions. Despite the low quality of evidence in the underlying primary studies, both SRs that assessed medication appropriateness found evidence that polypharmacy interventions improved it. However, there was no consistent evidence of any impact on downstream patient-centered outcomes such as healthcare utilization, morbidity, or mortality.

Project description:Background: Multiple systematic reviews explore the effect of phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors on erectile dysfunction (ED), with each study addressing specific outcomes. However, physicians and policymakers require a holistic approach of this topic. Objective: To summarize the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of PDE5 inhibitors for the management of ED through an overview of systematic reviews. Methods: Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus databases, as well as sources of grey literature until June 12, 2021 (PROSPERO: CRD42020216754). We considered systematic reviews, meta-analyses or network meta-analyses of randomized trials that provided outcomes about the efficacy and safety of any approved PDE5 inhibitor (avanafil, sildenafil, tadalafil and vardenafil). We constructed forest plots for meta-analytic effects regarding the change in erectile function, adverse events and dropouts after administration of PDE5 inhibitors in the general population and in specific patient groups. Results: We included 23 studies with 154,796 participants and a total of 258 meta-analytic effects. Sildenafil 25 mg [Weighted Mean Difference (WMD): 13.08, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 10.1-16.06] seemed to be statistically superior to all interventions in improving erectile function compared to placebo, but studies with low-dose sildenafil are lacking. Moreover, comparing among different PDE5 inhibitors, sildenafil 50 mg or sildenafil 100 mg were considered the most effective compounds in the general population. The latter derived, however, predominantly from indirect comparisons among different PDE5 inhibitors. Still, sildenafil 100 mg was associated with more treatment-related adverse events and dropouts. Interestingly, low-dose daily tadalafil may be more effective than high-dose on-demand tadalafil (WMD: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.03-2.44). Furthermore, testosterone and PDE5 inhibitors in patients with ED and hypogonadism seem to further improve symptoms, while the addition of a-blockers in patients with urinary symptoms treated with PDE5 inhibitors does not provide additional benefits (WMD: -0.8, 95% CI: -1.65-0.06). Conclusion: Although the efficacy and safety of PDE5 inhibitors, compared to placebo, is well-documented, the existing evidence comparing different PDE5 inhibitors is low. Therefore, high-quality, head-to-head, trials comparing different PDE5 inhibitors are necessary to determine their ideal dosage and formulation based on their safety and efficacy profile. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier [CRD42020216754].

Dataset Information

Interventions to Treat Erectile Dysfunction and Premature Ejaculation: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Introduction

Aim

Methods

Main outcome measure

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Interventions to Treat Erectile Dysfunction and Premature Ejaculation: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets