Critical Appraisal of Evidence on Platelet-Rich Plasma and Stem Cell Therapy for Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Narrative Review
Ishfaq M., Gopi P., Omar A., Floyd MS., Victor Ezenwa E., Ravichandran S.
Clinical Trial, published in Cureus (2025) — 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
- Cureus (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40510063
- PMCID
- PMC12159960
- DOI
- 10.7759/cureus.84009
Abstract (original English)
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a common condition, affecting 20% of individuals. It is defined by the involuntary loss of urine during activities that increase intra-abdominal pressure, such as coughing or physical exertion. SUI may result from urethral hypermobility or intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Conventional treatments, including pelvic floor exercises, sling surgeries, and bulking agents, have varying success rates and complications. Emerging regenerative therapies such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and stem cell therapy (SCT) hold promise for improving urethral support and rhabdosphincter function. This review critically examines recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of PRP and SCT for treating SUI. A thorough search of databases was conducted, focusing on clinical studies published on adult SUI patients treated with PRP and SCT interventions. Nine clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. All studies were conducted between 2011 and 2024. The keywords used were "Stress Urinary Incontinence", "Regenerative Medicine", Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy", "Stem Cell Transplantation", and "Stem Cell". These studies investigated the use of PRP and mesenchymal stem cells, but inconsistencies in treatment protocols raise concerns about the reliability and generalizability of their findings. Additionally, there was a lack of detailed assessment tools to evaluate sphinc
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.