Evaluation of Verapamil Efficacy in Peyronie’S Disease Comparing With Pentoxifylline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Peyronie's disease described as penile curvature, fibromathosis and pain that occur most often in men aged 40 to 60 years. The main complaint that caused the patient to visit the clinic is nodules on the upper surface of the penis, causing curvature and distortion particularly during erection, but they don't have any urinary problem. In this study, we evaluated the effect of verapamil compared to pentoxifylline in Peyronie's disease. METHODS: In this study, 90 patients with signs and symptoms of Peyronie's disease which were diagnosed and were in the age range 40 to 70 years enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into 3 groups. First group received pentoxifylline orally at a dose of 400 mg three times a day, in the second group verapamil (10 mg every other week for up to 12 sessions) was injected into the lesion and the third group received both treatments in combination. RESULTS: In patients, who received pentoxifylline, curvature reduction was 26.7%, plaque size reduction was 30%, the recovery rate of erectile dysfunction was 46.7% and pain reduced was 73.3%. Each of these cases in patients, who used beta-blockers, was 36.7%, 33.3%, 66.7% and 76.6%. In combination therapy, curvature reduction was 36.7%, plaque size reduction was 33.3%, the recovery rate of erectile dysfunction was 86.7% and pain reduced was 80%. CONCLUSION: In our study there was no significant difference between two groups using verapamil or pentoxifylline, but there was a significant improvement in combination therapy group. Due to our results we propose that combination therapy can improve results and should be considered as a choice in treatment of Peyronie's disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".