↓ Skip to main content

Safety and efficacy of low intensity shockwave (LISW) treatment in patients with erectile dysfunction

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety and efficacy of low intensity shockwave (LISW) treatment in patients with erectile dysfunction
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, October 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2014.0386
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Ruffo, M. Capece, D. Prezioso, G. Romeo, E. Illiano, L. Romis, G. Di Lauro, F. Iacono

Abstract

The primary goal in the management strategy of a patient with ED would be to determine its etiology and cure it when possible, and not just to treat the symptoms alone. One of the new therapeutic strategies is the use of low intensity extracorporeal shockwave (LISW) therapy. The mechanism of shockwave therapy is not completely clear. It is suggested that LISW induces neovascularization and improvement of cavernosal arterial flow which can lead to an improvement of erectile function by releasing NO, VEGF and PCNA. 31 patients between February and June 2013 with mild to severe ED and non-Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors responders were enrolled. Patients underwent four weekly treatment sessions. During each session 3600 shocks at 0.09mJ/ mm2 were given, 900 shocks at each anatomical area (right and left corpus cavernosum, right and left crus). Improvement of the erectile function was evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF), the Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diaries (SEP-Questions 2 and 3) and Global Assessment Questions (GAQ-Q1 and GAQ-Q2). At 3-month follow-up IIEF-EF scores improved from 16.54±6.35 at baseline to 21.03±6.38. Patients answering 'yes' to the SEP-Q2 elevated from 61% to 89% and from 32% to 62% in the SEP-Q3. A statistically significant improvement was reported to the Global Assessment Questions (GAQ-Q1 and GAQ-Q2). In conclusion, we can affirm that LISW is a confirmed therapeutic approach to erectile dysfunction that definitely needs more long-term trials to be clarified and further verified.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 13 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Unspecified 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 18 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,963,252
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#280
of 691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,154
of 274,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 691 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.