Objective::To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing placenta accreta spectrum (PAS).Methods::We conducted a comprehensive literature search from database inception to November 2023 using terms such as placenta creta, increta, percreta, PAS, MRI, and their respective Medical Subject Headings terms. All prospective and retrospective cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies involving prenatal magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of PAS with subsequent pathological confirmation were included.Results::A total of 40 studies encompassing 3664 women met the inclusion criteria, with 1894 cases confirmed pathologically as PAS. The overall sensitivity of MRI was 0.867 (95% confidence interval ( CI): 0.807-0.910), and the specificity was 0.860 (95% CI: 0.799-0.905), with a correlation of 0.693 between sensitivity and specificity. The estimated odds ratio was 28.693 (95% CI: 14.463-56.924), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.178 (95% CI: 0.122-0.258), and the positive likelihood ratio was 4.316 (95% CI: 3.186-5.846). Analysis of individual MRI criteria revealed estimates of sensitivity, specificity, odds ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio for abnormal placental bed vascularization as 0.500, 0.740, 2.788, 0.571, and 1.645 respectively; 0.384, 0.985, 6.270, 0.471, and 2.720 for bladder wall interruption; 0.766, 0.818, 13.638, 0.262, and 3.375 for the presence of dark intraplacental bands; 0.691, 0.913, 10.828, 0.352, and 3.361 for heterogeneous placenta; 0.688, 0.984, 34.886, 0.254, and 7.164 for indistinctive myometrium; 0.757, 0.864, 8.496, 0.362, and 2.778 for loss of retroplacental dark zone; 0.828, 0.593, 5.829, 0.329, and 1.766 for myometrial thinning; and 0.518, 0.916, 9.473, 0.411, and 3.526 for placental bulge, respectively. Conclusion::MRI demonstrates significant utility in diagnosing PAS and its severity. It is recommended for use in all cases with inconclusive ultrasonographic findings.Registration::Registration number CRD42021267501.

Objective::To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing placenta accreta spectrum (PAS).Methods::We conducted a comprehensive literature search from database inception to November 2023 using terms such as placenta creta, increta, percreta, PAS, MRI, and their respective Medical Subject Headings terms. All prospective and retrospective cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies involving prenatal magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of PAS with subsequent pathological confirmation were included.Results::A total of 40 studies encompassing 3664 women met the inclusion criteria, with 1894 cases confirmed pathologically as PAS. The overall sensitivity of MRI was 0.867 (95% confidence interval ( CI): 0.807-0.910), and the specificity was 0.860 (95% CI: 0.799-0.905), with a correlation of 0.693 between sensitivity and specificity. The estimated odds ratio was 28.693 (95% CI: 14.463-56.924), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.178 (95% CI: 0.122-0.258), and the positive likelihood ratio was 4.316 (95% CI: 3.186-5.846). Analysis of individual MRI criteria revealed estimates of sensitivity, specificity, odds ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and positive likelihood ratio for abnormal placental bed vascularization as 0.500, 0.740, 2.788, 0.571, and 1.645 respectively; 0.384, 0.985, 6.270, 0.471, and 2.720 for bladder wall interruption; 0.766, 0.818, 13.638, 0.262, and 3.375 for the presence of dark intraplacental bands; 0.691, 0.913, 10.828, 0.352, and 3.361 for heterogeneous placenta; 0.688, 0.984, 34.886, 0.254, and 7.164 for indistinctive myometrium; 0.757, 0.864, 8.496, 0.362, and 2.778 for loss of retroplacental dark zone; 0.828, 0.593, 5.829, 0.329, and 1.766 for myometrial thinning; and 0.518, 0.916, 9.473, 0.411, and 3.526 for placental bulge, respectively. Conclusion::MRI demonstrates significant utility in diagnosing PAS and its severity. It is recommended for use in all cases with inconclusive ultrasonographic findings.Registration::Registration number CRD42021267501.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine current global practices in regenerative therapy (RT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) and to establish expert recommendations for its use, addressing the current lack of solid evidence and standardized guidelines. Materials and Methods: A 39-question survey was developed by senior Global Andrology Forum (GAF) experts to comprehensively cover clinical aspects of RT. This was distributed globally via a secure online Google Form to ED specialists through the GAF website, international professional societies, and social media, the responses were analyzed and presented for frequencies as percentages. Consensus on expert recommendations for RT use was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: Out of 479 respondents from 62 countries, a third reported using RT for ED. The most popular treatment was low-intensity shock wave therapy (54.6%), followed by platelet-rich plasma (24.5%) and their combination (14.7%), with stem cell therapy being the least used (3.7%). The primary indication for RT was the refractory or adverse effects of PDE5 inhibitors, with the best effectiveness reported in middle-aged and mild-to-moderate ED patients. Respondents were confident about its overall safety, with a significant number expressing interest in RT’s future use, despite pending guidelines support. Conclusions This inaugural global survey reveals a growing use of RT in ED treatment, showcasing its diverse clinical applications and potential for future widespread adoption. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence and clear guidelines requires further research to standardize RT practices in ED treatment.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine current global practices in regenerative therapy (RT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) and to establish expert recommendations for its use, addressing the current lack of solid evidence and standardized guidelines. Materials and Methods: A 39-question survey was developed by senior Global Andrology Forum (GAF) experts to comprehensively cover clinical aspects of RT. This was distributed globally via a secure online Google Form to ED specialists through the GAF website, international professional societies, and social media, the responses were analyzed and presented for frequencies as percentages. Consensus on expert recommendations for RT use was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: Out of 479 respondents from 62 countries, a third reported using RT for ED. The most popular treatment was low-intensity shock wave therapy (54.6%), followed by platelet-rich plasma (24.5%) and their combination (14.7%), with stem cell therapy being the least used (3.7%). The primary indication for RT was the refractory or adverse effects of PDE5 inhibitors, with the best effectiveness reported in middle-aged and mild-to-moderate ED patients. Respondents were confident about its overall safety, with a significant number expressing interest in RT’s future use, despite pending guidelines support. Conclusions This inaugural global survey reveals a growing use of RT in ED treatment, showcasing its diverse clinical applications and potential for future widespread adoption. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence and clear guidelines requires further research to standardize RT practices in ED treatment.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine current global practices in regenerative therapy (RT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) and to establish expert recommendations for its use, addressing the current lack of solid evidence and standardized guidelines. Materials and Methods: A 39-question survey was developed by senior Global Andrology Forum (GAF) experts to comprehensively cover clinical aspects of RT. This was distributed globally via a secure online Google Form to ED specialists through the GAF website, international professional societies, and social media, the responses were analyzed and presented for frequencies as percentages. Consensus on expert recommendations for RT use was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: Out of 479 respondents from 62 countries, a third reported using RT for ED. The most popular treatment was low-intensity shock wave therapy (54.6%), followed by platelet-rich plasma (24.5%) and their combination (14.7%), with stem cell therapy being the least used (3.7%). The primary indication for RT was the refractory or adverse effects of PDE5 inhibitors, with the best effectiveness reported in middle-aged and mild-to-moderate ED patients. Respondents were confident about its overall safety, with a significant number expressing interest in RT’s future use, despite pending guidelines support. Conclusions This inaugural global survey reveals a growing use of RT in ED treatment, showcasing its diverse clinical applications and potential for future widespread adoption. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence and clear guidelines requires further research to standardize RT practices in ED treatment.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine current global practices in regenerative therapy (RT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) and to establish expert recommendations for its use, addressing the current lack of solid evidence and standardized guidelines. Materials and Methods: A 39-question survey was developed by senior Global Andrology Forum (GAF) experts to comprehensively cover clinical aspects of RT. This was distributed globally via a secure online Google Form to ED specialists through the GAF website, international professional societies, and social media, the responses were analyzed and presented for frequencies as percentages. Consensus on expert recommendations for RT use was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: Out of 479 respondents from 62 countries, a third reported using RT for ED. The most popular treatment was low-intensity shock wave therapy (54.6%), followed by platelet-rich plasma (24.5%) and their combination (14.7%), with stem cell therapy being the least used (3.7%). The primary indication for RT was the refractory or adverse effects of PDE5 inhibitors, with the best effectiveness reported in middle-aged and mild-to-moderate ED patients. Respondents were confident about its overall safety, with a significant number expressing interest in RT’s future use, despite pending guidelines support. Conclusions This inaugural global survey reveals a growing use of RT in ED treatment, showcasing its diverse clinical applications and potential for future widespread adoption. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence and clear guidelines requires further research to standardize RT practices in ED treatment.

Purpose: This study aimed to examine current global practices in regenerative therapy (RT) for erectile dysfunction (ED) and to establish expert recommendations for its use, addressing the current lack of solid evidence and standardized guidelines. Materials and Methods: A 39-question survey was developed by senior Global Andrology Forum (GAF) experts to comprehensively cover clinical aspects of RT. This was distributed globally via a secure online Google Form to ED specialists through the GAF website, international professional societies, and social media, the responses were analyzed and presented for frequencies as percentages. Consensus on expert recommendations for RT use was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: Out of 479 respondents from 62 countries, a third reported using RT for ED. The most popular treatment was low-intensity shock wave therapy (54.6%), followed by platelet-rich plasma (24.5%) and their combination (14.7%), with stem cell therapy being the least used (3.7%). The primary indication for RT was the refractory or adverse effects of PDE5 inhibitors, with the best effectiveness reported in middle-aged and mild-to-moderate ED patients. Respondents were confident about its overall safety, with a significant number expressing interest in RT’s future use, despite pending guidelines support. Conclusions This inaugural global survey reveals a growing use of RT in ED treatment, showcasing its diverse clinical applications and potential for future widespread adoption. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence and clear guidelines requires further research to standardize RT practices in ED treatment.