Autologous regenerative cell therapy for female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes
Chen J., Zhi Y., Liu W., Fan Y., Lin Y., Zhong Q.
Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 591, published in Front Med (Lausanne) (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- 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
- Meta-analysis
- Journal
- Front Med (Lausanne) (2026)
- Reported sample size
- 591
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 42318411
- PMCID
- PMC13271920
- DOI
- 10.3389/fmed.2026.1861606
Abstract (original English)
Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of autologous regenerative cell therapy for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Methods A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases. Data analysis was performed using RevMan and Stata. The primary outcomes were cure and improvement rate. Secondary outcomes included pad test, leakage frequency, questionnaire scores, quality of life, urodynamic parameters, loss to follow-up rate, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted based on heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots, begg test, and egger test. Results A total of 19 studies encompassing 591 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that regenerative cell therapy was associated with a pooled cure rate of 41% and a pooled improvement rate of 55% (17 studies). Regenerative cell therapy significantly reduced pad test, decreased leakage frequency, and improved incontinence-specific questionnaires and quality of life. In terms of urodynamic parameters, post-void residual volume was significantly improved, while no significant improvements were observed in maximum urethral closure pressure or maximum flow rate. The loss to follow-up rate and adverse events were no more than 8%. Significant heterogeneity was observed across all outcome measure
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.