Background: The improvement of absent or partial response in the medical treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) has led to the development of minimally invasive new treatment modalities in the field of regenerative medicine. Methods: A literature review on stem cell therapy for the treatment of ED was performed. We searched for the terms “erectile dysfunction” and “stem cell therapy” in PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov. Literature searching was conducted in English and included articles from 2010 to 2022. Results: New treatment modalities for ED involving stem cell therapy are not only conceived with a curative intent but also aim to avoid unnecessary adverse effects. Several sources of stem cells have been described, each with unique characteristics and potential applications, and different delivery methods have been explored. A limited number of interventional studies over the past recent years have provided evidence of a safety profile in their use and promising results for the treatment of ED, although there are not enough studies to generate an appropriate protocol, dose or cell lineage, or to determine a mechanism of action. Conclusions: Stem cell therapy is a novel treatment for ED with potential future applications. However, most urological societies agree that further research is required to conclusively prove its potential benefit.

Background: Infectious complications are common after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Clinical guidelines recommend, previous to surgery, prolonged antibiotic regimens in patients with preoperative positive urine cultures to reduce infectious risk. However, such strategies may increase selective pressure and promote antimicrobial resistance. Evidence supporting the use of a single antibiotic dose tailored to culture sensitivity in these cases is limited but emerging. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study including 187 PCNL procedures performed between 2021 and 2023 under an individualized antibiotic prophylaxis protocol. Patients with negative or contaminated urine cultures received a single empirical dose, while those with recent positive cultures received a single dose based on antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Postoperative complications—including fever, sepsis, and a composite outcome—were analyzed through multivariable logistic regression, comparing high- and low-risk patients. Results: A total of 67.9% of procedures were performed in patients meeting at least one high-risk criterion, including a positive preoperative urine culture in 32.1%. The overall incidence of infectious complications was 11.9% (fever 8.7%, sepsis 3.2%), with no significant differences between risk groups. A low concordance was observed between preoperative and intraoperative urine cultures (Spearman = 0.3954). Conclusions: A single preoperative antibiotic dose adjusted to the antibiogram, even in patients with a positive urine culture, was not associated with increased infectious complications. This approach is an initial step that supports a rational and individualized prophylactic strategy aligned with the goals of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs).