Table 10.

Impact of Urolift procedure on the ejaculatory status.

Reference	Aim	Study Design	Main Results	EjD Results
Roehrborn et al., Can J Urol. Jun 2015 [57]	To report the three year results of use of the Prostatic Urethral Lift	Prospective, multi-center, randomized, blinded, sham control	IPSS improvement of 88% at three month 41.1% at 3 years	No de novo erectile or ejaculation dysfunction
Roehrborn et al., Can J Urol. Jun 2017 [58]	To report the five year results of use of the Prostatic Urethral Lift	Prospective, multi-center, randomized, blinded, sham control	IPSS improvement of 88% 41.1% at 3 years 36% at 5 years Surgical retreatment: 13.6% over 5 years	No de novo erectile or ejaculation dysfunction
Beurrier et al., Prog Urol. Jul 2015 [59]	To report the results of UroLift implants after a 2-year experience in the technique	Prospective monocentric N 23	Median IPSS and IPSS-QoL were improved significantly (11 [1–27] and 2 [0–6], p < 0.0001) No significant improved in Qmax	No patient reported retrograde ejaculation or worsened erectile function
Userovici et al., Prog Urol. Mar 2020 [60]	To report the results of Urolift® system in our center after 7years experience.	N 40	At 3 months IPSS and IPSS-QdV were significantly improved (8 [4–11] vs. 20 [17–24]; p < 0.0001 and 2 [1,2] vs. 5 [4–6]; p < 0.0001).	MSHQ-EjD and IIEF5 were not modified (respectively 13 [11–14] vs. 12 [9–13]; p = 0.69 and 21 [18–23]; p = 0.13)