Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 5

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Contemporary management of ischemic priapism: A 12‐year population‐based analysis from a large US database

Licari, Leslie Claire, Bologna, Eugenio, Ditonno, Francesco, Franco, Antonio, Lasorsa, Francesco, Bignante, Gabriele, Proietti, Flavia, Leonardo, Costantino, Anele, Uzoma A., Cherullo, Edward E., Levine, Laurence A., Autorino, Riccardo, Manfredi, Celeste·2025·Andrology

Abstract

Background: Priapism is a urological condition characterized by a persistent erection. The management varies based on its subclassifications. Despite established clinical guidelines for ischemic priapism, there is a lack of large‐scale research focused on patient characteristics and management strategies. Objectives: To analyze the contemporary management of ischemic priapism in the US, exploring patient demographics and clinical characteristics, as well as predictors of erectile dysfunction (ED) and penile prosthesis implantation (PPI). Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the PearlDiver Mariner database, reviewing records from 2010–2021. Adult males diagnosed with ischemic priapism were included. Data analysis covered demographic, clinical variables, and management strategies. Predictors of de novo ED and PPI were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: Of 36,120 patients, most (93%) received only medical management, and a minority underwent surgical interventions (penile shunt surgery [PSS], PPI or both). Medical management was typically effective, as 67.08% of the patients in this group experienced only one episode of priapism. However, de novo ED occurred in 16.57% of these patients. The majority of patients undergoing PPI had an inflatable prosthesis (81%). Older age (odds ratio, OR 1.02), the presence of metabolic diseases (OR 1.39), neurogenic disorders (OR 1.72), solid pelvic malignancies (OR 1.09), and multiple episodes of priapism were identified as significant predictors of de novo ED (all p < 0.05). Similarly, age (OR 1.03), the presence of metabolic diseases (OR 1.23), solid pelvic malignancies (OR 1.99), and multiple episodes of priapism were associated with higher likelihood of PPI (all p < 0.05). Conclusion: Most cases of ischemic priapism are managed with the medical therapy. Less than 3% of patients with ischemic priapism receive PPI, and when this occurs an inflatable prosthesis is favored. Age, specific comorbidities, and multiple episodes of priapism appear to be significant predictors of ED and PPI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/andr.13740

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. SaloniaA BettocchiC CarvalhoJ CoronaG JonesTH KadiogluA.European Association of Urology Guidelines on Sexual and Reproductive Health.2023. Accessed February 2024.https://uroweb.org/guidelines/sexual‐and‐reproductive‐health/chapter/priapism
  2. 10.1002/smrj.37 · DOI
  3. 10.1097/JU.0000000000002767 · DOI
  4. Khan QS, 2016, Priapism: what cause: mental illness, psychotropic medications or poly‐substance abuse?, J Okla State Med Assoc, 109, 515
  5. 10.1155/2019/6214921 · DOI
  6. 10.1001/jama.2022.10233 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/S0022‐5347(17)45549‐2 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.urology.2021.03.063 · DOI
  9. 10.1182/hematology.2022000380 · DOI
  10. 10.1097/00005650‐199801000‐00004 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.008 · DOI
  12. 10.1111/bju.15370 · DOI
  13. 10.5152/tud.2023.22209 · DOI
  14. 10.1038/s41443‐024‐00928‐0 · DOI
  15. 10.3390/app11157090 · DOI
  16. 10.1590/s1677‐5538.ibju.2020.s125 · DOI
  17. 10.2147/RRU.S278807 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.08.002 · DOI
  19. 10.21037/tau‐23‐224 · DOI
  20. 10.1093/jsxmed/qdad075 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/s41443‐021‐00518‐4 · DOI
  22. 10.1097/JU.0000000000001183 · DOI
  23. 10.1111/jsm.12816 · DOI
  24. 10.1177/1756287217717913 · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1743‐6109.2009.01665.x · DOI
  26. 10.1007/s10545‐017‐0107‐6 · DOI
  27. 10.18632/oncotarget.23366 · DOI
  28. 10.1038/s41443‐019‐0141‐z · DOI
  29. 10.4081/aiua.2016.2.150 · DOI
  30. 10.3390/diseases11010034 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.10.002 · DOI
  32. 10.3390/jcm12072697 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Licari, L. C., Bologna, E., Ditonno, F., Franco, A., Lasorsa, F., Bignante, G., Proietti, F., Leonardo, C., Anele, U. A., Cherullo, E. E., Levine, L. A., Autorino, R., & Manfredi, C.
Venue
Andrology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-08-14
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
811-820
ISSN
  • 2047-2919
  • 2047-2927
Cited by
5
References
0
Language
en

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.