Cited by 235Sexual function and dysfunction studiesProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research

Erectile Function Recovery Rate after Radical Prostatectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Tal, Raanan, Alphs, Hannah H., Krebs, Paul, Nelson, Christian J., Mulhall, John P.·2009·The Journal of Sexual Medicine

Abstract

Introduction: Erectile function recovery (EFR) rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) vary greatly based on a number of factors, such as erectile dysfunction (ED) definition, data acquisition means, time-point postsurgery, and population studied. Aim: To conduct a meta-analysis of carefully selected reports from the available literature to define the EFR rate post-RP. Main Outcome Measures: EFR rate after RP. Methods: An EMBASE and MEDLINE search was conducted for the time range 1985–2007. Articles were assessed blindly by strict inclusion criteria: report of EFR data post-RP, study population ≥50 patients, ≥1 year follow-up, nerve-sparing status declared, no presurgery ED, and no other prostate cancer therapy. Meta-analysis was conducted to determine the EFR rate and relative risks (RR) for dichotomous subgroups. Results: A total of 212 relevant studies were identified; only 22 (10%) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed (9,965 RPs, EFR data: 4,983 subjects). Mean study population size: 226.5, standard deviation = 384.1 (range: 17–1,834). Overall EFR rate was 58%. Single center series publications (k = 19) reported a higher EFR rate compared with multicenter series publications (k = 3): 60% vs. 33%, RR = 1.82, P = 0.001. Studies reporting ≥18-month follow-up (k = 10) reported higher EFR rate vs. studies with <18-month follow-up (k = 12), 60% vs. 56%, RR = 1.07, P = 0.02. Open RP (k = 16) and laparoscopic RP (k = 4) had similar EFR (57% vs. 58%), while robot-assisted RP resulted in a higher EFR rate (k = 2), 73% compared with these other approaches, P = 0.001. Patients <60 years old had a higher EFR rate vs. patients ≥60 years, 77% vs. 61%, RR = 1.26, P = 0.001. Conclusions: These data indicate that most of the published literature does not meet strict criteria for reporting post-RP EFR. Single and multiple surgeon series have comparable EFR rates, but single center studies have a higher EFR. Younger men have higher EFR and no significant difference in EFR between ORP and LRP is evident.

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/j.1743-6109.2009.01351.x

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Up to 90% of men treated for prostate cancer will experience significant sexual side effects.

    “However, despite advances in the effectiveness of PC treatment in eradicating cancer, up to 90% of men treated will experience significant sexual side effects.1,3”

    From Preliminary Development of a Mindfulness-Based Group Therapy to Expand Couples’ Sexual Intimacy after Prostate Cancer: A Mixed Methods Approach (2021) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction reports that long-term erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy has been reported in approximately 14–90% of men. That supports the upper-end figure for this specific surgery and outcome, but not the claim as phrased for all men treated for prostate cancer or for sexual side effects generally. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Side effects of prostate cancer treatments impact the sexual lives of men and their partners, including erectile dysfunction, climacturia, anorgasmia, urinary or fecal incontinence, penile shortening, and/or loss of sexual desire.

    “Side effects of PC treatments impact the sexual lives of men and their partners, including erectile dysfunction, climacturia (loss of urine with ejaculation), anorgasmia (inability to reach orgasm), urinary or fecal incontinence, penile shortening, and/or loss of sexual desire.1,3, 4, 5, 6,8,12”

    From Preliminary Development of a Mindfulness-Based Group Therapy to Expand Couples’ Sexual Intimacy after Prostate Cancer: A Mixed Methods Approach (2021) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction states that erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy can negatively affect men and their sexual partners, and it identifies urinary continence as a treatment outcome. It does not support the sentence’s other listed effects—climacturia, anorgasmia, fecal incontinence, penile shortening, or loss of sexual desire—or extend its findings beyond radical prostatectomy to prostate cancer treatments generally. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Following prostate cancer treatments, sexual functioning and satisfaction sharply decline.

    “Following PC treatments, sexual functioning and satisfaction sharply decline.1,2,14”

    From Preliminary Development of a Mindfulness-Based Group Therapy to Expand Couples’ Sexual Intimacy after Prostate Cancer: A Mixed Methods Approach (2021) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Introduction (page not available) reports long-term erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy, supporting a decline in one aspect of sexual functioning. The paper addresses surgery rather than prostate cancer treatments generally, and the cited passages do not establish a sharp decline in sexual satisfaction. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • PDE5 inhibitors have variable effectiveness for prostate cancer survivors.

    “However, PDE5is have variable effectiveness for PC survivors,1,16”

    From Preliminary Development of a Mindfulness-Based Group Therapy to Expand Couples’ Sexual Intimacy after Prostate Cancer: A Mixed Methods Approach (2021) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Discussion reports wide variation in erectile-function recovery after radical prostatectomy and notes that some studies used erectogenic therapy. It also says those studies did not detail the therapy’s impact on their results. Searches for PDE5 inhibitors and treatment response found no passage assessing whether PDE5 inhibitors have variable effectiveness for prostate cancer survivors. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [36]Stroup DF Berlin JA Morton SC Olkin I Williamson GD Rennie D Moher D Becker BJ Sipe TA Thacker SB Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group JAMA 2000 283 2008 12 10789670

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tal, R., Alphs, H. H., Krebs, P., Nelson, C. J., & Mulhall, J. P.
Affiliations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Mulhall, John P.
Venue
The Journal of Sexual Medicine
Published
2009-09-01
Volume
6
Issue
9
Pages
2538-2546
ISSN
  • 1743-6095 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-6109
OpenAlex
W2056609863
Cited by
235
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 9
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Sexual Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748, T32CA009461)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Keywords
erectile function recovery, radical prostatectomy, erectile dysfunction, nerve-sparing surgery, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, open radical prostatectomy, follow-up duration, prostate cancer surgery outcomes, publication bias
MeSH terms
Aged, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Penile Erection, Postoperative Complications, Prostatectomy, Risk, Risk Factors, Impotence, Vasculogenic

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