Cited by 26Urological Disorders and TreatmentsSexual function and dysfunction studiesDupuytren's Contracture and Treatments

Peyronie's disease: urologist's knowledge base and practice patterns

Open access
Sullivan, J., Moskovic, D., Nelson, C., Levine, L., Mulhall, J.·2015·Andrology

Abstract

Summary: Peyronie's disease (PD) is a poorly understood clinical entity. We performed an in‐depth analysis of the knowledge base and current practice patterns of urologists in the United States. A 46‐question instrument was created by two experienced PD practitioners and emailed to current American Urology Association members nationally. Questions were either multiple‐choice or used a visual analogue scale. Responses regarding treatment options were answered by ranking a list of utilized therapies by preference. Data were aggregated and mean values for each category compiled. Responses were received from 639 urologists (67% in private practice). Almost all (98%) reported seeing PD patients with regularity. Twenty‐six percent believed PD prevalence is ≤1%, a small fraction (5%) reporting prevalence as ≥10%. Only 3% referred patients to a subspecialist in PD. Twenty‐six percent believed PD is a condition that does not warrant any treatment. The preferred initial management was with oral agents (81%). Of those who used intralesional injections as first line, verapamil was most commonly selected (67%). Seventy‐nine percent perform surgery for PD with 86% reporting the optimal timing at ≥12 months after onset of symptoms. Seventy percent perform penile plication, most commonly the Nesbit technique (54%), 61% perform implant surgery and 37% reported performing plaque incision/excision and grafting. Although PD is now a more recognized condition, there are still large variances in knowledge and management strategies. Prospective clinical studies are needed to elucidate standardized management guidelines and a more cohesive strategy to manage this common disease.

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.292

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sullivan, J., Moskovic, D., Nelson, C., Levine, L., & Mulhall, J.
Affiliations
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Sullivan, J.
Venue
Andrology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-10-20
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
260-264
ISSN
  • 2047-2919 (ISSN-L)
  • 2047-2927
OpenAlex
W2126650112
Cited by
26
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Andrology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Dupuytren's Contracture and Treatments
Keywords
Peyronie's disease, clinical practice patterns, treatment preferences, verapamil, intralesional injection, penile plication, penile implant surgery, timing of surgery
MeSH terms
Workforce, Humans, Male, Penile Induration, Urology, Knowledge Bases

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