ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2013
[Stem cell therapy and tissue engineering in regenerative urology].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recapitulating the urinary bladder--where are we heading?Nature reviews. Urology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSo far there is no clinically established, effective tissue engineering therapy for dysfunction or defects of the lower urinary tract. The concentration of experimental data, initial clinical studies and individual case reports underlines that stem cell treatment for bladder storage and voiding problems, erectile dysfunction and other urothelial defects of the lower urinary tract could close the gap between individualized therapy and potential biomedical applications.
resultsAs a result of fundamental research work over the last decade a characterization of various stem cell populations and evaluation of different urological therapy options could be performed. Thereby, aspects of optimal administration, migration, secretion of bioactive factors and stage of differentiation of stem cells with respect to an improved efficiency of treatment were investigated. Because successful tissue regeneration depends on angiogenesis and innervation, particular attention was paid to these important factors.
conclusionsVarious clinical indications for stem cell treatment and tissue reconstruction that may be required after radical prostatectomy, such as stress urinary incontinence, urethral reconstruction and erectile dysfunction have materialized and are currently being verified in preclinical studies and phase I trials.
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.