ArticleRegenerative therapy2019
Endoscopic repair of the urinary bladder with magnetically labeled mesenchymal stem cells: Preliminary report.
Article in Regenerative therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional polysaccharide-based bioactive delivery systems for urinary and reproductive system therapeutics.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Review
- The Application of Magnetic Particles for Cell Targeting in Preclinical Animal Models: A Systematic Review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Review
- Emerging Bioactive Agent Delivery-Based Regenerative Therapies for Lower Genitourinary Tissues.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Role of human adipose-derived stem cells (hADSC) on TGF-β1, type I collagen, and fibrosis degree in bladder obstruction model of Wistar rats.BMC urology · 2022Article
- Iron Oxide Nanoparticles in Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Non-Muscular Invasive Bladder Cancer: Re-envisioning Therapeutic Journey from Traditional to Regenerative Interventions.Aging and disease · 2021Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTransurethral resection of a bladder tumor (TURBT) using a resectoscope has been standard treatment for bladder cancer. However, no treatment method promotes the repair of resected bladder tissue. The aim of this study was to examine the healing process of damaged bladder tissue after a transurethral injection of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) into the bladder. An injection of magnetic MSCs meant that they accumulated in the damaged area of the bladder. Another aim of this study was to compare the acceleration effect of MSC magnetic delivery on the repair of bladder tissue with that of non-magnetic MSC injection.
methodsUsing the transurethral approach to avoid opening the abdomen, electrofulguration was carried out on the anterior wall of the urinary bladder of white Japanese rabbits to mimic tumor resection. An external magnetic field directed at the injured site was then applied using a 1-tesla (T) permanent magnet. Twelve rabbits were divided into three groups. The 1 × 10
resultsThe macroscopic findings showed the area of repair tissue in the MSC M+ group to be larger than that in either the MSC M-group or control group. MRI clearly depicted the macroscopic findings. The histological study showed that repair of the cauterized area with myofibrous tissue was significantly better in the MSC M+ group than that in either the MSC M-group or control group, although there was no significant difference in several mRNA cytokines among the three groups at 14 days after surgery.
conclusionsThe magnetic delivery of MSCs shows promise as an effective, minimally invasive method of enhancing tissue regeneration after TURBT.
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.