ReviewBMC urology2025
An updated narrative review on revolutionizing erectile dysfunction treatment: the crucial role of trophic factors in Adipose-Derived stem cell therapy.
Review in BMC urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07544537 (A Prospective Comparative Study of Autologous Bone Marrow-Derived and Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma and Standard Therapy in Patients With Organic Erectile Dysfunction), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Prospective Comparative Study of Autologous Bone Marrow-Derived and Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma and Standard Therapy in Patients With Organic Erectile Dysfunction
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging fibrosis and function: an integrated mechanistic and therapeutic framework for Peyronie's disease and related erectile dysfunction.Sexual medicine · 2026Review
- Extracellular vesicles in erectile dysfunction: a narrative review of multicellular regulation.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
- Superior penile girth retention with stromal vascular fraction-enriched autologous fat grafting: a retrospective 1-year comparative study.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Research trends and hotspots in Adipose-Derived Stem Cell applications for peripheral nerve regeneration from 2000 to 2025: a bibliometrics visualization study.Brain & spine · 2026Review
- Genetic biomarkers associated with risk and therapeutic response in erectile dysfunction: a systematic review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a pervasive condition projected to affect some 322 million men worldwide by 2025, profoundly impairing quality of life and psychosocial well‑being. Current therapies-most notably phosphodiesterase‑5 inhibitors and mechanical devices-offer only transient, symptomatic relief and do not repair the underlying vascular, smooth muscle, and neural degeneration driving ED, particularly in diabetic and neurogenic subtypes. Emerging non‑cellular modalities (e.g. low‑intensity pulsed ultrasound or shockwave therapy) likewise lack demonstrated long‑term safety and durable efficacy. Adipose‑derived stem cell (ADSC) therapy has emerged as a promising regenerative strategy. In preclinical models, ADSCs exert paracrine effects-secreting trophic factors (VEGF, IGF‑1, SDF‑1, NGF) and exosomal microRNAs-that stimulate angiogenesis, smooth muscle restoration, and nerve regeneration. Innovative delivery platforms (thermosensitive hydrogels, size‑controlled spheroids, magnetic guidance) and genetic enhancements (iNOS or PEDF overexpression) further improve cell retention and functional outcomes. Early-phase clinical trials confirm ADSC safety and suggest improvements in International Index of Erectile Function scores, but are limited by small cohorts, heterogeneous protocols, and short follow‑up. Critical gaps persist that hinder translation to routine practice: the long‑term safety and efficacy of ADSC therapy remain unestablished; retention of transplanted cells in target tissues is inconsistent; methods for cell isolation, processing, dosing, delivery routes, and outcome monitoring are highly variable; and potential adverse effects-immunogenic responses or malignant transformation-have not been fully characterized. Moreover, standardized, mechanism‑based biomarkers and regulatory frameworks are lacking. To bridge these gaps, next‑generation approaches are under investigation: ADSC‑derived exosomes as cell‑free therapeutics; genetic or epigenetic modification of ADSCs to boost reparative potency; and combination regimens pairing ADSCs with adjunct modalities such as low‑intensity shockwave therapy. Rigorous, well‑powered phase II/III trials with standardized protocols, long‑term follow‑up, and mechanistic endpoints are urgently needed to validate efficacy, ensure safety, and establish best‑practice guidelines. Addressing these unmet needs could shift ED management from palliative symptom relief toward true tissue regeneration and durable cure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.