ArticleWorld journal of urology2009
Do current bladder smooth muscle cell isolation procedures result in a homogeneous cell population? Implications for bladder tissue engineering.
Article in World journal of urology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Population Kinetics and Protein Profiles of Co-Cultured Adult and Fetus Rabbit Bladder Smooth Muscle Cells.Urology research & practice · 2025Article
- Tissue Engineering in Pediatric Bladder Reconstruction-The Road to Success.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2019Review
- Towards non-invasive characterisation of coronary stent re-endothelialisation - An in-vitro, electrical impedance study.PloS one · 2018Article
- A simple, rapid, and efficient method for isolating detrusor for the culture of bladder smooth muscle cells.International urology and nephrology · 2016Article
- Effective combination of hydrostatic pressure and aligned nanofibrous scaffolds on human bladder smooth muscle cells: implication for bladder tissue engineering.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConventional techniques used to harvest and culture bladder smooth muscle cells (SMCs) have been thought to yield homogeneous populations of SMCs. In order to delineate the cellular composition of tissue derived bladder cells, this study was conducted to determine whether current culturing techniques result in a uniform population of bladder SMCs that may be utilized for bladder tissue engineering.
methodsPatient derived bladder muscle was isolated and manually minced followed by enzymatic digestion. Cells were cultured in D: -valine alpha-MEM with decreasing levels of fetal bovine serum then fixed and permeabilized for flow cytometric and immunofluorescent analyses. Antibody staining of cultured cells consisted of alpha-SMA, von Willebrand factor, pan-cytokeratin, CD31, and CD90. Cells were visualized using directly conjugated fluorescein isothiocyanate primary or IgG-Alexa-555 conjugated secondary antibodies.
resultsFlow cytometric analyses revealed mixed populations of cells expressing non-SMC epitopes as corroborated by immunofluorescent studies. High density oligonucleotide array analysis revealed expression levels of known bladder SMC genes and the expression of endothelial and fibroblast related markers (P < 0.005).
conclusionsPhenotypic analyses demonstrate cell heterogeneity when SMCs are acquired and cultured through conventional methods. Standardized criteria based upon objective experimentation need to be established in order to better characterize bladder SMCs that are to be utilized for bladder tissue engineering.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.