Cited by 202Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentSexual function and dysfunction studiesUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research

Meta-analysis of rates of erectile function after treatment of localized prostate carcinoma

Robinson, John W, Moritz, Sabine, Fung, Tak·2002·International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Abstract

Purpose The results of a 1997 meta-analysis of the rates of erectile function after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and radical prostatectomy have been widely used in patient and professional education materials and as a reference against which new findings are compared. With a number of recent publications, it is now possible to update this analysis and compare brachytherapy with or without EBRT with EBRT alone, standard and nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy, and cryotherapy.Methods A comprehensive literature review and subsequent meta-analysis of the rates of erectile dysfunction associated with the treatments of localized prostate carcinoma was conducted. A simple logistic regression analysis was used to combine the data from the 54 articles that met the selection criteria.Results The predicted probability of maintaining erectile function after brachytherapy was 0.76, after brachytherapy plus EBRT 0.60, after EBRT 0.55, after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy 0.34, after standard radical prostatectomy 0.25, and after cryotherapy 0.13. When only studies reporting > or = 2 years follow-up were considered, the only significant change was a decline in the probability for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. No brachytherapy studies had a follow-up of > or = 2 years. When the probabilities were adjusted for age, the spread between the RT methods and surgical approaches was greater.Conclusion The differences in the probability of maintaining erectile function after different treatments of localized prostate cancer are significant.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0360-3016(02)03030-4

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, J. W., Moritz, S., & Fung, T.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Robinson, John W
Venue
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-11
Volume
54
Issue
4
Pages
1063-1068
ISSN
0360-3016 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158090738
Cited by
202
References
57
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 18
FWCI
2.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Keywords
erectile dysfunction, localized prostate cancer, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy, radical prostatectomy, cryotherapy, erectile function preservation, treatment comparison
MeSH terms
Aged, Brachytherapy, Humans, Erectile Dysfunction, Male, Middle Aged, Penile Erection, Probability, Prostatectomy, Prostatic Neoplasms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review