Developing Repair Materials for Stress Urinary Incontinence to Withstand Dynamic Distension.
Hillary CJ., Roman S., Bullock AJ., Green NH., Chapple CR., MacNeil S.
Prospective Study, published in PLoS One (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- 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
- Prospective Study
- Journal
- PLoS One (2016)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 26981860
- PMCID
- PMC4794140
- DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0149971
- Citations
- 20
Abstract (original English)
Background Polypropylene mesh used as a mid-urethral sling is associated with severe clinical complications in a significant minority of patients. Current in vitro mechanical testing shows that polypropylene responds inadequately to mechanical distension and is also poor at supporting cell proliferation. Aims and objectives Our objective therefore is to produce materials with more appropriate mechanical properties for use as a sling material but which can also support cell integration. Methods Scaffolds of two polyurethanes (PU), poly-L-lactic acid (PLA) and co-polymers of the two were produced by electrospinning. Mechanical properties of materials were assessed and compared to polypropylene. The interaction of adipose derived stem cells (ADSC) with the scaffolds was also assessed. Uniaxial tensiometry of scaffolds was performed before and after seven days of cyclical distension. Cell penetration (using DAPI and a fluorescent red cell tracker dye), viability (AlamarBlue assay) and total collagen production (Sirius red assay) were measured for ADSC cultured on scaffolds. Results Polypropylene was stronger than polyurethanes and PLA. However, polypropylene mesh deformed plastically after 7 days of sustained cyclical distention, while polyurethanes maintained their elasticity. Scaffolds of PU containing PLA were weaker and stiffer than PU or polypropylene but were significantly be
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.