Advances in stem cell therapy for male stress urinary incontinence.
Gallo F., Ninotta G., Schenone M., Cortese P., Giberti C.
Clinical Trial, published in Expert Opin Biol Ther (2019) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Clinical Trial
- Journal
- Expert Opin Biol Ther (2019)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 30709326
- DOI
- 10.1080/14712598.2019.1578343
Abstract (original English)
Among the several options that have been proposed in recent years for the management of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI), stem cell therapy represents a new frontier in treatment. The aim of this paper is to update the current status of stem cell therapy in animal and human studies for the management of iatrogenic male SUI. A literature review was conducted based on MEDLINE/PubMed searches for English articles using a combination of the following keywords: stem cell therapy, urinary incontinence, prostatectomy, regenerative medicine, mesenchymal stem cells. The few studies reported in the literature have demonstrated short-term safety and promising results of stem cell therapy in treating male SUI. However, many aspects need to be clarified before stem cell therapy can be introduced into daily urologic practice. In fact, important issues such as the limitations of these studies in terms of small sample sizes and short follow-ups, the incomplete knowledge of the mechanism of action of stem cells, the technical details regarding the delivery method and the best sources of stem cells, the safety risks regarding genomic or epigenetic changes and potential immune reactions in the longer term need to be identified in more stringent clinical trials.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.