The journal of sexual medicine · 2026 · 系統性回顧（依標題推測）
Systematic review on the safety and effectiveness of restorative therapies for erectile dysfunction.
心血管・呼吸・內科 · 勃起功能障礙
中文閱讀摘要
系統性回顧評估五種勃起功能障礙修復療法，聚焦式震波療法治療結果不一致，其他療法證據有限，尚無定論。
AI 依來源摘要整理，未經人工逐篇核對。閱讀結論前，請回溯研究族群、方法與限制。
原始摘要
Introduction
Several restorative (or regenerative) therapies have been proposed in the past 15 years to reverse the underlying pathophysiology associated with erectile dysfunction.
Objectives
The aim of this International Society for Sexual Medicine-commissioned review of restorative therapies for erectile dysfunction was to systematically review the literature to determine the safety and efficacy of these therapies.
Methods
A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL database of controlled trials was performed to identify comparative studies published from January 2010 through November 2023. Two reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Five restorative therapies were assessed: low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy (focused or radial), intracorporal stem cell injections, intracorporal platelet-rich plasma injections, and low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. Outcomes of interest included adverse events and changes in validated erectile function symptom scores. The Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials and observational studies, respectively.
Results
A total of 36 studies were included, 30 randomized controlled trials and 6 non-randomized studies. Most of these studies (n = 23) evaluated focused shockwave therapy. Results for focused shockwave therapy compared to sham were mixed. While some sham-controlled trials reported statistically significant improvements in erectile function scores favoring focused shockwave therapy, other trials found no significant difference between groups. Additionally, many studies (78%) did not report or compare the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in erectile function. Among those that did, further methodological concerns including the use of MCID thresholds with instruments for which no MCID has been validated (ie, IIEF-5) and reporting a combined MCID in cohorts with mixed severity of erectile function limit confidence in the result. Other restorative therapies also report limited and inconsistent evidence.
Conclusions
The data regarding focused shockwave therapy for erectile dysfunction remains mixed, with some trials showing benefit compared to sham and others showing no difference. The heterogeneity of treatment protocols, methodological limitations across studies, and inconsistent MCID reporting preclude definitive conclusions about clinical efficacy. All restorative therapies, including focused shockwave therapy, require further investigation in well-designed trials with standardized protocols and validated outcome measures before routine clinical use can be recommended.
至 Europe PMC 閱讀完整來源 ↗ · 擷取日期 2026-10-19
書目、來源與全文狀態
- DOI
- 10.1093/jsxmed/qdag145
- PMID／PMCID
- 42251759
- 作者
- Kohn T, El-Sakka A, Facio F, Martinez Salamanca JI, Raheem O, Park K, Lin G, Goldstein I, Cocci A, Hamel C, Lee WG
- 首次發表日期
- 2026-06-01Europe PMC 提供，部分日期可能依年份或月份推定。
- 卷／期／頁碼或文章編號
- 23 ／ 7 ／ qdag145
- 書目來源與查核日期
- Europe PMC · 2026-10-19僅核對書目欄位與來源連結；不代表已評讀研究品質。
- 全文與授權
- 來源尚未確認免費全文。 來源授權標示：cc by。
可回溯引用
Kohn T, El-Sakka A, Facio F, Martinez Salamanca JI, Raheem O, Park K, Lin G, Goldstein I, Cocci A, Hamel C, Lee WG. Systematic review on the safety and effectiveness of restorative therapies for erectile dysfunction. The journal of sexual medicine. 2026;23(7):qdag145. PMID: 42251759. doi:10.1093/jsxmed/qdag145
本站供教育與研究參考。單篇摘要、文體標籤與期刊影響係數不等於證據品質或個別病人的診療建議。