Tissue engineering for the pelvic floor.
MacNeil S., Mangir N., Roman S., Mironska E.
Narrative Review, published in Curr Opin Urol (2019) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Curr Opin Urol (2019)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 30950868
- DOI
- 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000620
- Citations
- 1
Abstract (original English)
Purpose of review To set in context the challenge of developing tissue-engineered constructs for use in the female pelvic floor compared with at least 30 years of research progress in tissue engineering for other tissues. Recent findings The relative lack of information on the mechanical requirements of the pelvic floor in women who have suffered damage to these tissues is a major challenge to designing tissue-engineered materials for use in this area. A few groups are now using autologous cells and biomaterials to develop constructs for repair and regeneration of the pelvic floor. Progress with these has reached early stage evaluation in small animal models. Meanwhile the regulatory challenge of introducing laboratory-expanded cell therapy into the clinic is prompting groups to look at alternatives, such as using lipoaspirate retrieved in theatre as a source of adult stem cells for a number of tissues. In our group, we have begun to look at lipoaspirate for repair of the pelvic floor. Summary There is a need for research to harvest the advances made over the last 30 years in developing tissue-engineered constructs for several tissues to now tackle the problems of the weakened pelvic floor. At present, there are relatively few groups engaged in this challenge despite the growing clinical need.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.