Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

From Regenerative Mechanisms to Clinical Practice: Current Status, Controversies, and Future Perspectives of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Urology and Sexual Medicine

Qu R., Gu J., Luo Y., Yang L., Dai Y.

Narrative Review on Immune Modulation, published in J Clin Med (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Narrative Review
Journal
J Clin Med (2026)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
42074752
PMCID
PMC13116286
DOI
10.3390/jcm15082949

Abstract (original English)

Background/Objectives: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous blood-derived biologic enriched in platelets and bioactive mediators. In urology and sexual medicine, PRP has been promoted for erectile dysfunction (ED) and a growing range of urogenital disorders on the premise that it may support angiogenesis, neuroregeneration, immune modulation, and tissue remodeling. However, clinical uptake has outpaced high-quality evidence, while heterogeneity in PRP preparation, characterization, and delivery limits interpretability and reproducibility. This structured narrative review aims to critically integrate mechanistic, preclinical, and clinical evidence regarding PRP use in ED, Peyronie's disease (PD), stress urinary incontinence (SUI), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS), and selected emerging indications. We further aim to identify sources of heterogeneity and propose an actionable minimum reporting framework (PRP-Uro Checklist) to guide future research. Methods: A structured search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted for studies published between 2021 and 2025. The relevant literature on PRP use in ED, PD, SUI, IC/BPS, and related indications was included for critical narrative synthesis. Emphasis was placed on PRP classification and preparation variables, outcome measure validity, and sources of heterogeneity across studies. Results: Mechanistic and preclinical

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research