Cell therapy for male sexual dysfunctions: systematic review and position statements from the European Society for Sexual Medicine
Manfredi C., Boeri L., Sokolakis I., Schifano N., Pyrgidis N., Fernández-Pascual E.
Systematic Review with a reported sample of 12, published in Sex Med (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Systematic Review
- Journal
- Sex Med (2024)
- Reported sample size
- 12
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 38344213
- PMCID
- PMC10857898
- DOI
- 10.1093/sexmed/qfad071
- Citations
- 7
Abstract (original English)
Background Cell therapy (CT) is a form of regenerative medicine under investigation for the management of male sexual dysfunction (MSD). Aim We sought to perform a systematic review of published information on CT for MSD and provide an official position statements for the European Society for Sexual Medicine. Methods A comprehensive bibliographic search on the MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted in February 2023. Articles were selected based on the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Study design (PICOS) model if they included male patients (P) undergoing CT (I) with or without comparison with other treatments (C) and evaluated the impact of CT on sexual function (O). Quantitative data were reported as found in the original studies (S). Level of evidence and grade of recommendation according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine were assigned to each statement. Outcomes Outcomes were determined based on assessment of erectile function, ejaculatory function, orgasmic function, sexual desire, and penile curvature. Results A total of 19 studies and 421 patients were included. Most articles (n = 12, 63%) were case series, whereas a minority of papers (n = 6, 32%) had a comparative group; only 2 articles reported randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 article reported a post hoc analysis of RCTs. Most articles (16, 8
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.