Safety and feasibility of platelet rich fibrin matrix injections for treatment of common urologic conditions

• Main Authors: Ethan L Matz, Amy M Pearlman, Ryan P Terlecki
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korean Urological Association 2018-01-01
• Series: Investigative and Clinical Urology
• Subjects: Erectile dysfunction; Penile induration; Platelet-rich fibrin; Platelet-rich plasma; Urinary incontinence; stress
• Online Access: https://www.icurology.org/Synapse/Data/PDFData/2020ICU/icu-59-61.pdf

Purpose: Autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) is used increasingly in a variety of settings. PRP injections have been used for decades to improve angiogenesis and wound healing. They have also been offered commercially in urology with little to no data on safety or efficacy. PRP could theoretically improve multiple urologic conditions, such as erectile dysfunction (ED), Peyronie's disease (PD), and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). A concern with PRP, however, is early washout, a situation potentially avoided by conversion to platelet rich fibrin matrix (PRFM). Before clinical trials can be performed, safety analysis is desirable. We reviewed an initial series of patients receiving PRFM for urologic pathology to assess safety and feasibility. Materials and Methods: Data were reviewed for patients treated with PRFM at our center from November 2012 to July 2017. Patients were observed immediately post-injection and at follow-up for complications and tolerability. Where applicable, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores were reviewed before and after injections for ED and/or PD. Pad use data was collected pre/post injection for SUI. Results: Seventeen patients were identified, with a mean receipt of 2.1 injections per patient. Post-procedural minor adverse events were seen in 3 men, consisting of mild pain at injection site and mild penile bruising. No patients experienced complications at follow-up. No decline was observed in men completing pre/post IIEF-5 evaluations. Conclusions: PRFM appears to be a safe and feasible treatment modality in patients with urologic disease. Further placebo-controlled trials are warranted.