Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35466714›Full record

ArticleCell transplantation

Replacing Needle Injection by a Novel Waterjet Technology Grants Improved Muscle Cell Delivery in Target Tissues.

Ruizhi Geng, Jasmin Knoll, Niklas Harland, Bastian Amend, Markus D Enderle, Walter Linzenbold, Tanja Abruzzese, Claudia Kalbe, Elisabeth Kemter, Eckhard Wolf and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell transplantation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Improved Sphincter Muscle Regeneration by Myoblasts fromMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ruizhi GengDepartment of Urology, Center for Medical Research, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4845-6184
Jasmin KnollDepartment of Urology, Center for Medical Research, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Niklas HarlandDepartment of Urology, University of Tübingen Hospital, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5532-4868
Bastian AmendDepartment of Urology, University of Tübingen Hospital, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Markus D EnderleErbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Tübingen, Germany.
Walter LinzenboldErbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Tübingen, Germany.
Tanja AbruzzeseDepartment of Urology, Center for Medical Research, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Claudia KalbeInstitute of Muscle Biology and Growth, Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Dummerstorf, Germany.
Elisabeth KemterDepartment of Molecular Animal Breeding and Biotechnology, LMU Munich, Oberschleißheim, Germany.
Eckhard WolfDepartment of Molecular Animal Breeding and Biotechnology, LMU Munich, Oberschleißheim, Germany.
Martin SchenkDepartment of Surgery, University of Tübingen Hospital, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Arnulf StenzlDepartment of Urology, University of Tübingen Hospital, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Wilhelm K AicherDepartment of Urology, Center for Medical Research, Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2210-6773
University of Tübingen · DEErbe Elektromedizin (Germany) · DEInstitute of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology · DEResearch Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current regimen to treat patients suffering from stress urinary incontinence often seems not to yield satisfactory improvement or may come with severe side effects. To overcome these hurdles, preclinical studies and clinical feasibility studies explored the potential of cell therapies successfully and raised high hopes for better outcome. However, other studies were rather disappointing. We therefore developed a novel cell injection technology to deliver viable cells in the urethral sphincter complex by waterjet instead of using injection needles. We hypothesized that the risk of tissue injury and loss of cells could be reduced by a needle-free injection technology. Muscle-derived cells were obtained from young male piglets and characterized. Upon expansion and fluorescent labeling, cells were injected into cadaveric tissue samples by either waterjet or injection needle. In other experiments, labeled cells were injected by waterjet in the urethra of living pigs and incubated for up to 7 days of follow-up. The analyses documented that the cells injected by waterjet

Indexed as

Muscle CellsNeedlesAnimalsHumansMaleMusclesSwineTechnologyUrethracell therapymuscle regenerationmyoblast injectionporcine modelurinary incontinencewaterjet technology

Identifiers

PMID35466714
PMCPMC9036380
OpenAlexW4224444125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.