The effect of penile traction device in men with Peyronie’s disease on penile curvature, penile length, and erectile dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Peyronie's disease (PD) results in curvature, pain, and erectile dysfunction (ED). Penile traction devices (PTDs) are a non-invasive treatment option for PD by applying mechanical forces to elicit biochemical responses that reduce curvature and improve penile function. In the present study, we systematically reviewed and analyzed the literature investigating the use of PTD to treat PD. Methods: We have conducted electronic and manual search strategies within the databases and included articles to find relevant studies. A total of Five studies met all the predefined inclusion criteria and were selected for inclusion in the review. Outcomes assessed are penile length, penile curvature, and erectile function (EF). The study population consisted of patients with PD, the intervention was penile traction therapy (PTT), the comparison was matched placebo or follow-up, and the study design was randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies. The Cochrane risk of bias assessed the studies' quality for randomized studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for non-randomized observational studies. All statistical analyses were performed using R software. Results were considered statistically significant for P<0.05. Results: Only five studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria and were published between 2014 and 2021. The sample sizes range [51-110], totaling 419, with a mean of 83.8 patients-the follow-up with a mean of 6.75 months. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of PTD on curvature degree, penile length, and EF in patients. There is a significant positive effect on the curvature degree (P=0.0373), while there is no significant effect on penile length and EF (P=0.5315 and 0.1010), respectively. They are Indicating low heterogeneity with an estimated total heterogeneity of 0. Overall, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of the intervention for penile length or EF. Conclusions: The current evidence suggests that PTDs can be a safe and effective treatment option for men with PD to reduce penile curvature. However, further research, including more RCTs with extended follow-up periods, is needed to fully understand their efficacy and determine the ideal timing and patient subtypes that would benefit from PTD.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".