MP47-07 EJACULATORY FUNCTION AFTER RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Medical, Hormonal & Non-surgical Therapy I (MP47)1 May 2024MP47-07 EJACULATORY FUNCTION AFTER RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS Umar Ghaffar, Behzad Abbasi, Nikit Venishetty, Adrian Fernandez, Robert Pearce, Nizar Hakam, Kevin D. Li, Hiren Patel, and Benjamin N. Breyer Umar GhaffarUmar Ghaffar , Behzad AbbasiBehzad Abbasi , Nikit VenishettyNikit Venishetty , Adrian FernandezAdrian Fernandez , Robert PearceRobert Pearce , Nizar HakamNizar Hakam , Kevin D. LiKevin D. Li , Hiren PatelHiren Patel , and Benjamin N. BreyerBenjamin N. Breyer View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008880.11564.10.07AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Ejaculation profiles in radiated men with prostate cancer have not been summarized in the existing literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess ejaculatory outcomes after radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer. METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Embase and Web of science were systematically queried to identify 18 articles assessing ejaculatory function post-radiation. Primary outcome was anejaculation rate and secondary outcomes included ejaculatory volume (EV), ejaculatory discomfort (ED) and mean decline in ejaculatory function scores (EFS). Quality assessment was done by Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Pooled proportions were calculated using inverse variance and random effects models for anejaculation rate and ejaculatory volume. RESULTS: Eighteen observational studies with 2115 patients reporting ejaculatory profiles post-RT were identified. Seven studies utilized external beam RT, 7 brachytherapy, 1 stereotactic RT and 2 utilized either external or brachytherapy in 1. Anejaculation rate was reported by 10 studies. The pooled proportion of anejaculation with random-effects model was 0.18 (95% CI 0.11-0.36). Pooled proportion of patients having decreased ejaculatory volume was 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.89). Ejaculatory discomfort was reported in 5 studies ranging from 3% to 15%. Decline in ejaculatory function scores was reported by 5 studies with 4 reaching statistical significance (Table 1). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing radiation are likely to experience meaningful impact on ejaculation profiles and hence should be counselled on the trajectory of these side-effects. Download PPT Source of Funding: N/A © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e764 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Umar Ghaffar More articles by this author Behzad Abbasi More articles by this author Nikit Venishetty More articles by this author Adrian Fernandez More articles by this author Robert Pearce More articles by this author Nizar Hakam More articles by this author Kevin D. Li More articles by this author Hiren Patel More articles by this author Benjamin N. Breyer More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».