STORZ MEDICAL – Literature Databases
STORZ MEDICAL – Literature Databases
Literature Databases
Literature Databases

Clavijo RI et al, 2016: Effects of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy on Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Clavijo RI, Kohn TP, Kohn JR, Ramasamy R.
Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Department of Urology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.


INTRODUCTION: Low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy (Li-ESWT) has been proposed as an effective non-invasive treatment option for erectile dysfunction (ED).
AIM: To use systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of Li-ESWT by comparing change in erectile function as assessed by the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) in men undergoing Li-ESWT vs sham therapy for the treatment of ED.
METHODS: Systematic search was conducted of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and for randomized controlled trials that were published in peer-reviewed journals or presented in abstract form of Li-ESWT used for the treatment of ED from January 2010 through March 2016. Randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion if they were published in the peer-reviewed literature and assessed erectile function outcomes using the IIEF-EF score. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in IIEF-EF score after treatment with Li-ESWT in patients treated with active treatment vs sham Li-ESWT probes. RESULTS: Data were extracted from seven trials involving 602 participants. The average age was 60.7 years and the average follow-up was 19.8 weeks. There was a statistically significant improvement in pooled change in IIEF-EF score from baseline to follow-up in men.
CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials, treatment of ED with Li-ESWT resulted in a significant increase in IIEF-EF scores.undergoing Li-ESWT vs those undergoing sham therapy (6.40 points; 95% CI = 1.78-11.02; I2 = 98.7%; P < .0001 vs 1.65 points; 95% CI = 0.92-2.39; I2 = 64.6%; P < .0001; between-group difference, P = .047). Significant between-group differences were found for total treatment shocks received by patients (P < .0001).

J Sex Med. 2016 Dec 13. pii: S1743-6095(16)30477-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.11.001. [Epub ahead of print]


Comments 1

Peter Alken on Friday, 17 March 2017 11:15

No free access via Karolinska Institute and Heidelberg University.

No free access via Karolinska Institute and Heidelberg University.
Friday, 24 March 2023