Mixed results on two treatments for erectile dysfunction

Plasma injections a bust

The trial that assessed platelet-rich plasma was not encouraging. The results of the prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial suggest that PRP is safe but not effective.

‌A proprietary version of the PRP injection is marketed as the “Priapus shot,” or the “P-shot,” despite a lack of solid evidence the therapy helps.

Brian Ledesma, MD, an andrology research fellow at the University of Miami, led the study, which received a “best abstract” award at the meeting. “We wanted to actually check and see – does this work or not?” Dr. Ledesma said of PRP injections generally.

Dr. Ledesma and his colleagues randomly assigned 61 men with mild to moderate ED to receive two intracavernosal injections of PRP 1 month apart (n = 28) or placebo treatment (n = 33). The primary outcome was change in IIEF score and the percentage of men meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) at 1 month. Complete data were available for 24 men who received PRP and for 28 who received placebo injections.

There was no significant difference in outcomes between the groups. IIEF scores changed from 17.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], –15.8 to 19.0) to 21 (95% CI, 17.9-24.0) for men who received PRP and from 18.6 (95% CI, 17.3-19.8) to 21.6 (95% CI, 19.1-24.1) for men in the placebo group (P = .756). Fourteen men (58.3%) in the PRP group, compared with 15 (53.6%) in the placebo group, met MCID. No differences were seen in mean penile Doppler parameters between PRP and placebo. The two adverse events reported in the trial were minor – a hematoma and “a new plaque that did not cause any curvature of the penis,” Dr. Ledesma said.

Platelet-rich plasma may be “really popular, but, objectively speaking, so far, we don’t have any evidence showing that it actually works.”

The study showed that “PRP was not more efficacious than placebo.” This treatment is “really popular, but, objectively speaking, so far, we don’t have any evidence showing that it actually works.”

Based on these findings, he said, “We would recommend sticking to the data primary care providers should tell their patients, ‘Don’t waste your money,’ because it’s pretty expensive.”

Dr. Kuritzky said more studies are needed for a definitive answer. “I think the results of PRP have been largely disappointing across most of the spheres of influence in which it’s been tried. So, it’s not so surprising to me that this trial would, again, not prove efficacious, but I’d have to hold judgment, dependent upon other trials,” he said.

Dr. Ledesma and his colleagues are conducting a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial “investigating whether PRP combined with shock-wave therapy could make a difference.” He said the trial, which is funded by the National Institutes of Health, is in the enrollment phase; results are expected in mid-2024.

Charles Runels, MD, who pioneered the P-Shot and other popular cosmetic procedures, defended the effectiveness of the injections.

“One of the legitimate criticisms of all of the review articles regarding PRP therapies in every field is that there is a significant variability in what people call PRP. The P-Shot represents a very specific protocol in the methods of preparing PRP, activating PRP, and injecting the PRP – all of which differ significantly from what was done in Ledesma’s study and which could account for their lack of results,” Dr. Runels said in an interview.

Dr. Runels added that “multiple studies” do show benefit of the injection of PRP for both erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease and support the success of his protocol. “Also, all of our providers – there are over 3,000 people in our Cellular Medicine Association – offer money back to our patients if there are not satisfactory results,” he said.

Dr. Kuritzky said that when patients ask him about investigational treatments for ED, he tells them to stick to the more traditional approaches, such as phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, intracorporeal injections, and vacuum devices.

But, he added, if other therapies are shown to be safe and effective “in a large population of men with diverse etiologies associated with their erectile dysfunction, including advanced age, diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension, cigarette smoking, then I think [they] could be recommended on a more consistent basis.”

Both studies were independently supported. Dr. Goldstein, Dr. Kuritzky, and Dr. Ledesma reported no relevant financial relationships.
 

A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.