the association of erectile dysfunction and cardiovascular disease: a systematic critical review
Clicks: 144
ID: 132230
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
144 views
20 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #4 of 4 articles by views in contemporary chinese political economy and strategic relations
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Despite strong association between erectile dysfunction (ED) and cardiovascular disease (CVD), there is a paucity of clear clinical guidelines detailing when and how to evaluate for ED in patients with known CVD, or vice versa. This systematic review discuss the role of cardiologists and urologists in the characterization of risk and management of CVD in the setting of ED, as well as contrasting the current evaluation of CVD and ED from the standpoint of published consensus statements. A comprehensive literature review utilizing MEDLINE®, the Cochrane Library® Central Search, and the Web of Science was performed to identify all published peer-reviewed articles in the English language describing ED and CVD across various disciplines. There is strong consensus that men with ED should be considered at high risk of CVD. Available risk assessment tools should be used to stratify the coronary risk score in each patient. The 2012 Princeton III Consensus Conference expanded on existing cardiovascular recommendations, proposing an approach to the evaluation and management of cardiovascular risk in men with ED and no known CVD. This systematic review highlights the similarities and differences of the existing clinical guidelines and recommendations regarding assessment and management of ED and CVD, as well as the pathophysiological linkage between ED and CVD, which may permit physicians, including urologists, to perform opportunistic screening and initiate secondary prophylaxis with regard to cardiovascular risk factors, particularly in young, nondiabetic men with ED.
| Reference Key |
md2017americanthe
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Omer A. Raheem MD;Jeannie J. Su MD;Joel R. Wilson MD;Tung-Chin Hsieh MD |
| Journal | contemporary chinese political economy and strategic relations |
| Year | 2017 |
| DOI |
10.1177/1557988316630305
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.