Raheem, Khera ao (2021) - Novel Treatments of Erectile Dysfunction Review of the Current Literature

(Unfortunate that this forum does not allow pdf uploads; hyperlinks can break.)

This articile gives a recent overview of research wrt:

  • shockwave
  • prp
  • stem cell

(Dr Goldstein told me these three are the most promising / “least unpromising” treatments for ed.)

Probably not interesting if you suffer from psychological / neurological / hormone related issues.
But, at first glance, a small goldmine of information if you have penile fibrosis (like me).

1 Like

I think shockwave and stem cell for sure…I was never really sold on PRP especially when it’s not that expensive to do yet they charge WAY more

Really it’s only blood thrown in a centrifuge I believe.
They extract the top layer of growth factors and inject it in. It shouldn’t 1500 bucks a session that’s absurd. 500-750 eh OK but 1500?? You better have proof at that point that it works

@dumdumdum Didn’t you just post somewhere else that this treatment didn’t have any lasting effect on you?

You said that you had 17 Shockwave treatments and 2x PRP treatments with an total effect of 2 months then back to Baseline.So this doesn’t sound too promising.


I have to emphasize that it really depends on the machine used.
I don’t know what machine Goldstein uses. He might be using an inferior machine, just saying where the pulses aren’t very strong.
Also depends on the condition of each persons body

Maybe the machine worked perfectly but it wouldn’t matter because if the physical condition

All you can do is go to a clinic where the machine is definitely legit and hope to God your body responds well to it and for a long time

“Most promising” simply means Goldstein thinks other treatments have (even) less chance of leading to a cure at some point in the future. It doesn’t mean they are perfect cures right now.

But I agree it sounds a bit too optimistic. I made an adjustment by adding “least unpromising”.

He uses a urogold mts 100.

1 Like

Sorry my ability to write, understand and read english decreases a bit because I don’t use it that often anymore except watching a few documentaries occasionally and because of PFS obviously. Therefore I couldn’t “read in between the lines”

Is that a good one?

I only know of the one definitely good one in Indiana

I’m currently looking for that one closer to New York

Depends on wether you trust Goldstein.

He said in 2019 the mts urogold 100 was the best device on the market with a price of $100k. Also he said this:

“There are a lot of imitation non-shock wave acoustic sound waves that are being scammed and sold to patients who are desperate,” said Dr. Goldstein, who uses a device known as the UroGold 100. “Real shock wave therapy has been shown to activate endogenous stem cells. This specific device is FDA cleared now in the U.S. for increasing blood flow, connective tissue activation, and amelioration of pain, and the FDA has classified this device a non-significant risk (NSR) to humans.”

Source: https://www.urologytimes.com/view/stem-cells-pose-risk-offer-promise-ed-other-diseases

But of course he also wants to sell treatments. And his treatments did not give lasting results in my case! Still I tend to trust Goldstein because of his impressive cv.

I also had treatments with the Dornier Aries 2 or the Medispec ED1000 (dont remember which one) but those treatments didnt even give a temporary improvement so that might be a bad sign.

1 Like

Hold up a minute:…after doing some serious research on this I think I found what’s up

Goldstein uses The UroGold MTS 100, which may be a very expensive machine HOWEVER is a RADIAL shockwave machine

The difference being that is not a FOCUSED shockwave. And Focused shockwave is the only technology that is backed up by science.

Only the studies with a Focused shockwave device like the Storz Duolith SD-1 and a couple others provide clinical proof that it has helped ED in any way

Just wanted to post this one too:

2021 Liu ao - Restorative Therapies for Erectile Dysfunction - Position Statement from the SMSNA

It is quite similar to the article posted above: also a nice overview of shockwave / stem cell / prp research.

I am mainly interested in stem cell for my fibrosis (shockwave/prp did not work) and rather impressed how consistently postive the results are. But I am also suspicious how trustworthy this is. SMSNA does not find the evidence sufficient. Im unsure how to judge this…