Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Tissue Engineering in Pediatric Bladder Reconstruction-The Road to Success

Horst M., Eberli D., Gobet R., Salemi S.

Narrative Review on Systemic / IV, published in Front Pediatr (2019) — 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
Narrative Review
Journal
Front Pediatr (2019)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
30984717
PMCID
PMC6449422
DOI
10.3389/fped.2019.00091
Citations
27

Abstract (original English)

Several congenital disorders can cause end stage bladder disease and possibly renal damage in children. The current gold standard therapy is enterocystoplasty, a bladder augmentation using an intestinal segment. However, the use of bowel tissue is associated with numerous complications such as metabolic disturbance, stone formation, urine leakage, chronic infections, and malignancy. Urinary diversions using engineered bladder tissue would obviate the need for bowel for bladder reconstruction. Despite impressive progress in the field of bladder tissue engineering over the past decades, the successful transfer of the approach into clinical routine still represents a major challenge. In this review, we discuss major achievements and challenges in bladder tissue regeneration with a focus on different strategies to overcome the obstacles and to meet the need for living functional tissue replacements with a good growth potential and a long life span matching the pediatric population.

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 evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research