标题:Efficacy and Safety of Udenafil for Erectile Dysfunction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
作者:Ding, Hui; Du, Wan; Wang, Hanzhang; Zhang, Liyuan; Wang, ZhiPing; Du, Chengwei; Tao, Yan
作者机构:[Ding, H; Du, W; Wang, HZ; Zhang, LY; Wang, ZP; Du, CW; Tao, Y]Lanzhou Univ, Hosp 2, Gansu Nephrourol Clin Ctr, Key Lab Dis Urol Syst,Inst 更多
通讯作者:Wang, ZP
通讯作者地址:[Wang, ZP]Lanzhou Univ, Hosp 2, Gansu Nephrourol Clin Ctr, Key Lab Dis Urol Syst Gansu Prov,Inst Urol, 80 Cui YingMen St, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peopl 更多
来源:UROLOGY
出版年:2012
卷:80
期:1
页码:134-139
DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2012.02.014
摘要:OBJECTIVE To systematically review the evidence on the efficacy and safety of udenafil as treatment of erectile dysfunction from randomized controlled trials.; METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database up to October 2011. The outcome measures assessed were the change from baseline for the International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score (primary), the change from baseline for Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2 and 3, the shift to normal rate (erectile function domain >= 26), the response to the Global Assessment Questionnaire and adverse effects (secondary). Two of us independently assessed the study quality and extracted data. All data were analyzed using Review Manager, version 5.0.2.; RESULTS Five randomized controlled trials totaling 1109 patients were included. At the follow-up endpoints, udenafil was found to be more effective than placebo, and the tolerability was good. The pooled results showed that the udenafil group was significantly greater than the placebo group in the change from baseline for the International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score (mean difference 5.65, 95% confidence interval 4.41-6.89, P < .00001). All included studies indicated that most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity, and no serious adverse events were reported during the study period. The most common drug-related adverse events were flushing and headache (udenafil vs placebo, 5.6% vs 1.8% and 3.1% vs 0%, respectively).; CONCLUSION The results from the current meta-analysis have suggested that udenafil is an effective and well-tolerated therapy for erectile dysfunction. The findings of the present review highlight the need for more efficient performance of higher quality, large-sample, various-race, long-term, randomized controlled trials to verify the efficacy and safety of udenafil. UROLOGY 80: 134-139, 2012. (c) 2012 Elsevier Inc.
收录类别:SCOPUS;SCIE
WOS核心被引频次:15
Scopus被引频次:17
资源类型:期刊论文
原文链接:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84862992763&doi=10.1016%2fj.urology.2012.02.014&partnerID=40&md5=a5787477bdb9e992ebc3a1ddd530aaa6
TOP