Testosterone pellet implants safe and effective for hormone replacement
As many of you know we have been offering testosterone pellet therapy for many years. Testosterone pellets are safe and effective as an alternative for testosterone replacement therapy. We have provided a study below documents safety and effectiveness.
STUDY: J Sex Med. 2017 Jan;14(1):47-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.11.305. Epub 2016 Dec 15. Testosterone Pellet Implantation Practices: A Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) Member Questionnaire. Piecuch MJ(1), Patel BG(2), Hakim L(3), Wang R(4), Sadeghi-Nejad H(1). Author information: (1)Department of Urology, Rutgers University-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA. (2)Department of Urology, Rutgers University-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA. Electronic address: firstname.lastname@example.org. (3)Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL, USA. (4)Department of Urology, University of Texas-Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
INTRODUCTION: There has been renewed interest in the use of subcutaneous testosterone pellets for the treatment of hypogonadism since the introduction of Testopel in 2008 by Slate Pharmaceuticals (Durham, NC, USA). Manufacturer guidelines recommend using two to six pellets; however, in the clinical setting, this is deemed insufficient. This has produced a wide variety of testosterone pellet usage that is not fully understood. AIM: To better understand subcutaneous testosterone pellet implantation practices among members of the Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA).
METHODS: A 19-item questionnaire was emailed to the 687 members of the SMSNA. Of the 19 questions, 17 were multiple choice and two required write-in responses. Usage patterns, satisfaction rates, and complication rates were investigated. MAIN
OUTCOME MEASURES: Data regarding indications for initiating treatment with Testopel, initial dosage, follow-up of testosterone levels and dose titration, patient tolerance and satisfaction, technique of implantation, and procedural complications were collected.
RESULTS: Eighty-seven survey responses were received (12.9%). At initiation of Testopel therapy, 80.5% of respondents would implant at least 10 pellets, whereas only 4.6% would place six to seven pellets and 3.4% would implant fewer than six pellets. Many respondents would determine the starting dose based on some combination of baseline testosterone level and weight, although 24.1% described using a standard starting dose for all patients. All respondents would check testosterone levels within 3 months of initiating therapy, with the vast majority (72.4%) doing so at 1 month. Subsequent dosing of Testopel was not changed in most patients, with 41.4% and 26.4% of respondents reporting that 60% to 80% and 80% to 100% of patients, respectively, remained on their initial dose. Most respondents would re-implant pellets at a 3-month (21.8%) or 4-month (43.7%) interval. High patient satisfaction was described by respondents, with 56.3% finding patients to be satisfied "most times" and 34.5% "almost always."
CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into the usage of Testopel among members of the SMSNA. We found that the vast majority of specialists use at least 10 pellets at initial implantation, with limited need for subsequent dose adjustments, good durability of response, and high patient satisfaction and tolerability.