ArticlePloS one2014
Is the poly (L- lactide- co- caprolactone) nanofibrous membrane suitable for urinary bladder regeneration?
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stem cell therapy for bladder regeneration: A comprehensive systematic review.Regenerative therapy · 2025Review
- Toward virtual bladder: real-time bladder volume monitoring with flexible AuCNT strain sensors.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Adipose tissue-derived stem cells as a therapeutic strategy for enterocutaneous fistula: an experimental model study.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Article
- Porcine Small Intestinal Submucosa (SIS) as a Suitable Scaffold for the Creation of a Tissue-Engineered Urinary Conduit: Decellularization, Biomechanical and Biocompatibility Characterization Using New Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- The Significance of Biomechanics and Scaffold Structure for Bladder Tissue Engineering.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Electrospinning: Application and Prospects for Urologic Tissue Engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Mesenchymal stromal cells modulate the molecular pattern of healing process in tissue-engineered urinary bladder: the microarray data.Stem cell research & therapy · 2019Article
- Stem Cells Seeded on Multilayered Scaffolds Implanted into an Injured Bladder Rat Model Improves Bladder Function.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2019Article
- Nanofibers as Bioinstructive Scaffolds Capable of Modulating Differentiation through Mechanosensitive Pathways for Regenerative Engineering.Regenerative engineering and translational medicine · 2019Article
- Challenges With the Development of Biomaterials for Sustainable Tissue Engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Article
- The interplay between adipose-derived stem cells and bladder cancer cells.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Bladder biomechanics and the use of scaffolds for regenerative medicine in the urinary bladder.Nature reviews. Urology · 2018Review
- Does the Mesenchymal Stem Cell Source Influence Smooth Muscle Regeneration in Tissue-Engineered Urinary Bladders?Cell transplantation · 2017Article
- Vascularization Potential of Electrospun Poly(L-Lactide-co-Caprolactone) Scaffold: The Impact for Tissue Engineering.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Characterization of a Murine Model of Bioequivalent Bladder Wound Healing and Repair Following Subtotal Cystectomy.BioResearch open access · 2017Article
- Use of Adipose-Derived Stem Cells to Support Topical Skin Adhesive for Wound Closure: A Preliminary Report from Animal In Vivo Study.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Isolation, expansion and characterization of porcine urinary bladder smooth muscle cells for tissue engineering.Biological procedures online · 2016Article
- New Amniotic Membrane Based Biocomposite for Future Application in Reconstructive Urology.PloS one · 2016Article
- Application of bladder acellular matrix in urinary bladder regeneration: the state of the art and future directions.BioMed research international · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare: a new five-layered poly (L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLC) membrane and small intestinal submucosa (SIS) as a control in rat urinary bladder wall regeneration. The five-layered poly (L-lactide-co-caprolactone) membrane was prepared by an electrospinning process. Adipose tissue was harvested from five 8-week old male Wistar rats. Adipose derived stem cells (ADSCs) were seeded in a density of 3×10(6) cells/cm2 onto PLC membrane and SIS scaffolds, and cultured for 5-7 days in the stem cell culture medium. Twenty male Wistar rats were randomly divided into five equal groups. Augmentation cystoplasty was performed in a previously created dome defect. Groups: (I) PLC+ 3×10(6)ADSCs; (II) SIS+ 3×10(6)ADSCs; (III) PLC; (IV) SIS; (V) control. Cystography was performed after three months. The reconstructed urinary bladders were evaluated in H&E and Masson's trichrome staining. Regeneration of all components of the normal urinary bladder wall was observed in bladders augmented with cell-seeded SIS matrices. The urinary bladders augmented with SIS matrices without cells showed fibrosis and graft contraction. Bladder augmentation with the PLC membrane led to numerous undesirable events including: bladder wall perforation, fistula or diverticula formation, and incorporation of the reconstructed wall into the bladder lumen. The new five-layered poly (L-lactide-co-caprolactone) membrane possesses poorer potential for regenerating the urinary bladder wall compared with SIS scaffold.
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.