Erectile Dysfunction and Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSC): what the trial registry contains

Why this is studied in Erectile Dysfunction

Erectile dysfunction is usually vascular and endothelial rather than structural, which is why regenerative approaches — cells, exosomes and shockwave adjuncts — target penile blood flow and nerve recovery. Post-prostatectomy nerve injury is a separate problem with a different time course, and the two are frequently blurred together in marketing.

What MSC means in this table

Mesenchymal stromal cells are the workhorse of commercial cell therapy: easy to source from fat, cord or marrow, easy to expand, and rarely characterised in the same way twice. Their proposed action is paracrine — signalling molecules that damp inflammation — rather than replacement of lost tissue. That matters when reading counts like these, because two studies filed under the same label can test materially different products at different doses by different routes.

The numbers

Every figure below comes from one reproducible query (erectile dysfunction x mesenchymal stem cell) run against ClinicalTrials.gov API v2 on 2026-08-29.

How mature is this evidence?

Later-phase work exists but is not dominant (2 of 23), which is the typical profile of a field that has shown safety and is still testing whether benefit survives a control arm.

Registrations do not all survive contact with recruitment — 7 completed here, 2 stopped early, giving a 9% attrition rate.

Median planned enrolment is 20 participants (largest single study: 5,000). Trials of this size can describe safety and generate hypotheses; detecting a modest clinical benefit reliably usually needs substantially larger numbers with a control group.

Where the studies are

Country coverage runs to 10, but the distribution has a long tail behind South Korea at about 20% of mentions.

Legal pathway differs by country — see where cell therapy is legal, by country.

Who runs them

Among the top lead sponsors, 7 are universities or hospitals and 6 are companies, making this a academic area.

• Pharmicell Co., Ltd. — 4 records
• Indonesia University — 3 records
• Sophia Al-Adwan — 2 records
• Chinese Academy of Sciences — 2 records
• Central Hospital, Nancy, France — 1 record
• National Scientific Medical Center, Kazakhstan — 1 record

Representative registered studies

Recruiting studies first, then the most advanced phases. Each identifier links to the registry record, where eligibility criteria, outcome measures and contacts are published.

What this page does and does not tell you

These figures describe effort, not outcome. Published results, with their control arms and endpoints, are where benefit is decided.

If a clinic offers you this today, the useful question is not "is there research?" but "which of these registered studies is mine part of, and if none, what evidence applies to the exact product I am being sold?" The Provider Question Builder turns that into a scored checklist.

Frequently asked

How many MSC studies for Erectile Dysfunction are recruiting right now?

5 of 23 registered records were listed as recruiting in the 2026-08-29 snapshot. Recruitment status changes frequently; the registry record is authoritative.

Is MSC an approved treatment for Erectile Dysfunction?

Registration on ClinicalTrials.gov is not approval. Approval is granted by a regulator for a specific product and indication after review of submitted evidence. 23 registered studies tell you research exists, not that a product cleared review.

How advanced is the research on MSC for Erectile Dysfunction?

2 of 23 records carry a Phase 3 or Phase 4 label and 7 are marked completed. Registrations run from 2013 to 2026.

Registry and literature counts retrieved 2026-08-29 (ClinicalTrials.gov API v2; PubMed E-utilities). Registration or publication volume measures research activity, not effectiveness or approval. Educational information — not medical advice; verify product, indication, legal pathway and evidence with an independent qualified physician. Page generated 2026-08-29. See our editorial standards.