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.

Background: and Purpose Vessel recanalization after cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is associated with favorable outcomes and lower mortality. Several studies examined the timing and predictors of recanalization after CVT with mixed results. We aimed to investigate predictors and timing of recanalization after CVT. Methods: We used data from the multicenter, international AntiCoagulaTION in the Treatment of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis (ACTION-CVT) study of consecutive patients with CVT from January 2015 to December 2020. Our analysis included patients that had undergone repeat venous neuroimaging more than 30 days after initiation of anticoagulation treatment. Prespecified variables were included in univariate and multivariable analyses to identify independent predictors of failure to recanalize. Results: Among the 551 patients (mean age, 44.4±16.2 years, 66.2% women) that met inclusion criteria, 486 (88.2%) had complete or partial, and 65 (11.8%) had no recanalization. The median time to first follow-up imaging study was 110 days (interquartile range, 60–187). In multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03–1.07), male sex (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24–0.80), and lack of parenchymal changes on baseline imaging (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29–0.96) were associated with no recanalization. The majority of improvement in recanalization (71.1%) occurred before 3 months from initial diagnosis. A high percentage of complete recanalization (59.0%) took place within the first 3 months after CVT diagnosis. Conclusion Older age, male sex, and lack of parenchymal changes were associated with no recanalization after CVT. The majority recanalization occurred early in the disease course suggesting limited further recanalization with anticoagulation beyond 3 months. Large prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings.

We identified risk factors, derived and validated a prognostic score for poor neurological outcome and death for use in cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Methods We performed an international multicenter retrospective study including consecutive patients with CVT from January 2015 to December 2020. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were collected. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to determine risk factors for poor outcome, mRS 3-6. A prognostic score was derived and validated. Results A total of 1,025 patients were analyzed with median 375 days (interquartile range [IQR], 180 to 747) of follow-up. The median age was 44 (IQR, 32 to 58) and 62.7% were female. Multivariable analysis revealed the following factors were associated with poor outcome at 90- day follow-up: active cancer (odds ratio [OR], 11.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.62 to 27.14; P<0.001), age (OR, 1.02 per year; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.04; P=0.039), Black race (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.27; P=0.025), encephalopathy or coma on presentation (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.39 to 5.30; P=0.004), decreased hemoglobin (OR, 1.16 per g/dL; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.31; P=0.014), higher NIHSS on presentation (OR, 1.07 per point; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.11; P=0.002), and substance use (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.16 to 4.71; P=0.017). The derived IN-REvASC score outperformed ISCVT-RS for the prediction of poor outcome at 90-day follow-up (area under the curve [AUC], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.79 to 0.87] vs. AUC, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.76], χ2 P<0.001) and mortality (AUC, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90] vs. AUC, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.79], χ2 P=0.03). Conclusions Seven factors were associated with poor neurological outcome following CVT. The INREvASC score increased prognostic accuracy compared to ISCVT-RS. Determining patients at highest risk of poor outcome in CVT could help in clinical decision making and identify patients for targeted therapy in future clinical trials.