ReviewIranian journal of medical sciences2020
Urodynamic Parameters in Spinal Cord Injury-Induced Neurogenic Bladder Rats after Stem Cell Transplantation: A Narrative Review.
Review in Iranian journal of medical sciences, 2020. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of sacral nerve root magnetic stimulation on bladder urodynamics and M3 receptor expression in rats with neurogenic bladder.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2025Article
- A comprehensive visual report of urodynamic study in rats with spinal cord injury.Current urology · 2025Article
- Human Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation Improved Functional Outcomes Following Spinal Cord Injury Concomitantly with Neuroblast Regeneration.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2023Article
- Blockade of vasopressin receptors reduces the threshold pressure of micturition reflex in female rats.Current research in physiology · 2022Article
- Stem Cell Therapy for Neurogenic Bladder Dysfunction in Rodent Models: A Systematic Review.International neurourology journal · 2020Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurogenic bladder (NGB) secondary to spinal cord injury (SCI) is accompanied with several complications such as urinary tract deterioration, urinary incontinence, and consequently lower quality of life (QoL), significant morbidities, and occasionally death. Current therapeutic methods have some side effects and there is no treatment for the upper urinary tract injuries. Stem cell therapy is a promising method for treating this condition. However, the best timing and the best route of its transplantation have not yet been determined. Animal models of SCI, especially in rats, are the most commonly used method for evaluating the efficacy of cell therapy in NGB improvement, and the most common assessment method is the urodynamic studies (UDS). However, there are variations in the range of UDS parameters among the published studies. The current review aimed to discuss the effect of stem cell transplantation on bladder dysfunction recovery based on urodynamic parameters after SCI in rats. For this purpose, the cell source, doses, the route of administration, and the complete UDS equipment and its parameters were summarized in SCI models in rats. In some urodynamic test results, to some extent, an improvement in the lower urinary system function was observed in each treatment group. However, this improvement was far from full functional recovery. The average cell dose was about 1 million cells in every injected site. In most studies, the stem cells (SCs) were transplanted 9 days after the injury using PE-50 and PE-60. Many researchers have recommended further experimental and clinical studies to confirm this treatment modality.
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.