Continuing Medical Education: Peyronie's Disease (CME)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The management of Peyronie's disease (PyD) presents several challenges to the clinician. Despite progress in the understanding of PyD on several fronts, it remains a physically and psychologically devastating condition for the affected patient and partner. AIM: The purpose of this Continuing Medical Education article is to review contemporary knowledge of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation, and management of PyD, thus enabling best-practice management. METHODS: An English-language MEDLINE review was performed from 1990 to present-day for PyD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Current state of, and new developments in, PyD. RESULTS: Recent studies have established a new paradigm for the natural history and epidemiology of PyD. Prevalence approaches 5%, while less than 20% of men report spontaneous resolution of deformity. The psychological sequelae on both patient and partner are underrepresented in literature; data gleaned from select Internet websites have better established Peyronie's effects on psyche and relationships. For the majority of patients, evaluation, information, and reassurance is sufficient. Few medical treatment options are supported by data from well-designed placebo-controlled trials. For men unresponsive to nonoperative therapies, plication, grafting, or implantation of a penile prosthesis are surgical management options. CONCLUSIONS: PyD does not invariably progress to a complete loss of the ability for sexual intercourse. Should deformities preclude intercourse, well-established medical or surgical options may be considered; indeed, using one or more of the treatment approaches outlined can, in most cases, result in adequate restoration of sexual function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.172 | 0.047 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".