MP36-19 PLATELET-RICH PLASMA AND STEM CELL THERAPY FOR ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION: CHARACTERIZATION OF MARKET FORCES IN MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologySexual Function/Dysfunction: Medical, Hormonal & Non-surgical Therapy II (MP36)1 Sep 2021MP36-19 PLATELET-RICH PLASMA AND STEM CELL THERAPY FOR ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION: CHARACTERIZATION OF MARKET FORCES IN MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS Gary Shahinyan, Robert Shahinyan, Shangyang Christopher Yang, James Weinberger, Jesse Mills, and Sriram Eleswarapu Gary ShahinyanGary Shahinyan More articles by this author , Robert ShahinyanRobert Shahinyan More articles by this author , Shangyang Christopher YangShangyang Christopher Yang More articles by this author , James WeinbergerJames Weinberger More articles by this author , Jesse MillsJesse Mills More articles by this author , and Sriram EleswarapuSriram Eleswarapu More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002045.19AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: A robust industry focusing on “regenerative” therapies has emerged to cater to men experiencing erectile dysfunction (ED). Independent providers have begun to market platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or stem cells directly to consumers, despite lack of scientific evidence. These treatments are not recommended beyond an investigational role by the AUA. We sought to characterize the landscape of PRP and stem cell treatments for ED by evaluating trends in marketing and deployment of these therapies in large metropolitan areas. We aim to describe costs of treatment, training and qualifications of providers, and level of standardization across treatment plans. METHODS: Using Google Search, we identified regenerative medicine treatment providers in seven large U.S. metropolitan areas. Search terms included: “PRP for ED in [city]”; “P shot in [city]”; “PRP for erectile dysfunction in [city]”; “Priapus shot in [city]”. Clinics were contacted by telephone; data regarding providers, prices, and durations of treatment were collected. RESULTS: A summary of results is shown in Table 1. Eighty-seven clinics provide PRP or stem cell treatments for ED in the metropolitan areas sampled. Comprehensive information was available for 68% of the clinics identified. 8% of providers had formal urology training. The average price of PRP injections was $1519 per injection (range $500-$2500). Stem cell therapy was offered by 10 providers, averaging $3620 per treatment (range $1000-$7000). Treatment courses ranged from one injection to indefinite injections based on patient circumstance. CONCLUSIONS: PRP and stem cell treatments suffer from substantial inconsistency and lack of standardization. Non-urologists predominate, and costs and frequency of therapy appear to be market-driven without evidence base. Advertised outcomes vary: some clinics suggest a single injection will be sufficient for cure, while others recommend repeat injections for indefinite time periods. The AUA and SMSNA classify these treatments as experimental and state explicitly that providers should not charge patients for these treatments. There is a critical need for urologists to take an active role in patient education and clinical research for these novel methodologies. Source of Funding: None © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e643-e643 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Gary Shahinyan More articles by this author Robert Shahinyan More articles by this author Shangyang Christopher Yang More articles by this author James Weinberger More articles by this author Jesse Mills More articles by this author Sriram Eleswarapu More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...