PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical framework for the diagnosis and treatment of Peyronie's disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using the PubMed®, EMBASE® and Cochrane databases (search dates 1/1/1965 to 1/26/15) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of PD. The review yielded an evidence base of 303 articles after application of inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: The systematic review was used to create guideline statements regarding treatment of PD. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence for a particular treatment was assigned a strength rating of A (high quality evidence; high certainty), B (moderate quality evidence; moderate certainty), or C (low quality evidence; low certainty). Evidence-based statements of Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendation were developed based on benefits and risks/burdens to patients. Additional consensus statements related to the diagnosis of PD are provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions due to insufficient published evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There is a continually expanding literature on PD; the Panel notes that this document constitutes a clinical strategy and is not intended to be interpreted rigidly. The most effective approach for a particular patient is best determined by the individual clinician and patient in the context of that patient's history, values, and goals for treatment. As the science relevant to PD evolves and improves, the strategies presented here will be amended to remain consistent with the highest standards of clinical care.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this guideline is to provide a clinical framework for the diagnosis and treatment of Peyronie's disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using the PubMed®, EMBASE® and Cochrane databases (search dates 1/1/1965 to 1/26/15) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of PD. The review yielded an evidence base of 303 articles after application of inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: The systematic review was used to create guideline statements regarding treatment of PD. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence for a particular treatment was assigned a strength rating of A (high quality evidence; high certainty), B (moderate quality evidence; moderate certainty), or C (low quality evidence; low certainty). Evidence-based statements of Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendation were developed based on benefits and risks/burdens to patients. Additional consensus statements related to the diagnosis of PD are provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions due to insufficient published evidence. CONCLUSIONS: There is a continually expanding literature on PD; the Panel notes that this document constitutes a clinical strategy and is not intended to be interpreted rigidly. The most effective approach for a particular patient is best determined by the individual clinician and patient in the context of that patient's history, values, and goals for treatment. As the science relevant to PD evolves and improves, the strategies presented here will be amended to remain consistent with the highest standards of clinical care.
Authors: Wayne J G Hellstrom; Muammer Kendirci; Richard Matern; Yolanda Cockerham; Leann Myers; Suresh C Sikka; Dennis Venable; Stanton Honig; Andrew McCullough; Lawrence S Hakim; Ajay Nehra; Lance E Templeton; Jon L Pryor Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Muammer Kendirci; Mustafa F Usta; Richard V Matern; Sepehr Nowfar; Suresh C Sikka; Wayne J G Hellstrom Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Martin Gelbard; Irwin Goldstein; Wayne J G Hellstrom; Chris G McMahon; Ted Smith; James Tursi; Nigel Jones; Gregory J Kaufman; Culley C Carson Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Georgios Hatzichristodoulou; Christoph Meisner; Jürgen E Gschwend; Arnulf Stenzl; Sven Lahme Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2013-07-30 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Christian J Nelson; Chris Diblasio; Muammer Kendirci; Wayne Hellstrom; Patricia Guhring; John P Mulhall Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2008-06-28 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Anthony J Bella; Jay C Lee; Ethan D Grober; Serge Carrier; Francois Benard; Gerald B Brock Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-02-22 Impact factor: 1.862