Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMC

Bladder reconstruction: The past, present and future

El-Taji OM., Khattak AQ., Hussain SA.

Laboratory Study, published in Oncol Lett (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Laboratory Study
Journal
Oncol Lett (2015)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
26170968
PMCID
PMC4487078
DOI
10.3892/ol.2015.3161
Citations
28

Abstract (original English)

Ileal conduit urinary diversion is the gold standard treatment for urinary tract reconstruction following cystectomy. This procedure uses gastrointestinal segments for bladder augmentation, a technique that is often associated with significant complications. The substantial progression in the fields of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine over the previous two decades has resulted in the development of techniques that may lead to the construction of functional de novo urinary bladder substitutes. The present review identifies and discusses the complications associated with current treatment options post-cystectomy. The current techniques, achievements and perspectives of the use of biomaterials and stem cells in the field of urinary bladder reconstruction are also reviewed.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.