Urine as a Main Effector in Urological Tissue Engineering-A Double-Edged Sword
Abbas TO., Ali TA., Uddin S.
Narrative Review, published in Cells (2020) — 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
- Cells (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 32110928
- PMCID
- PMC7140397
- DOI
- 10.3390/cells9030538
- Citations
- 25
Abstract (original English)
In order to reconstruct injured urinary tract tissues, biodegradable scaffolds with autologous seeded cells are explored in this work. However, when cells are obtained via biopsy from individuals who have damaged organs due to infection, congenital disorders, or cancer, this can result in unhealthy engineered cells and donor site morbidity. Thus, neo-organ construction through an alternative cell source might be useful. Significant advancements in the isolation and utilization of urine-derived stem cells have provided opportunities for this less invasive, limitless, and versatile source of cells to be employed in urologic tissue-engineered replacement. These cells have a high potential to differentiate into urothelial and smooth muscle cells. However, urinary tract reconstruction via tissue engineering is peculiar as it takes place in a milieu of urine that imposes certain risks on the implanted cells and scaffolds as a result of the highly cytotoxic nature of urine and its detrimental effect on both growth and differentiation of these cells. Both of these projections should be tackled thoughtfully when designing a suitable approach for repairing urinary tract defects and applying the needful precautions is vital.
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.