Animal models, treatment options, and biomaterials for female stress urinary incontinence.
Tan X., Li G., Li C., Kong C., Li H., Wu S.
Narrative Review, published in Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- 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
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2024)
- Country
- Switzerland
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 39267906
- PMCID
- PMC11390547
- DOI
- 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1414323
- Citations
- 5
Abstract (original English)
In the quest to tackle stress urinary incontinence (SUI), the synthesis of cutting-edge biomaterials and regenerative materials has emerged as a promising frontier. Briefly, animal models like vaginal distension and bilateral ovariectomy serve as crucial platforms for unraveling the intricacies of SUI, facilitating the evaluation of innovative treatments. The spotlight, however, shines on the development and application of novel biomaterials-ranging from urethral bulking agents to nano-gel composites-which aim to bolster urethral support and foster tissue regeneration. Furthermore, the exploration of stem cell therapies, particularly those derived from adipose tissues and urine, heralds a new era of regenerative medicine, offering potential for significant improvements in urinary function. This review encapsulates the progress in biomaterials and regenerative strategies, highlighting their pivotal role in advancing the treatment of SUI, thereby opening new avenues for effective and minimally invasive solutions.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.