ReviewCureus2024
The Impact and Implications of Regenerative Medicine in Urology.
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Progress of Tissue Engineering With Stem Cells in Urology Updated Review in 2025.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urology focuses on the treatment of genitourinary disorders through therapies ranging from lifestyle changes to advanced surgeries; the field has recently incorporated robotic and minimally invasive technologies that have improved patient outcomes and reduced hospital stays and complications. However, these methods still have certain limitations. Regenerative medicine, focusing on natural repair abilities, can be an effective and safer alternative. This review aims to examine the impact of regenerative medicine in urology. We adopted a systematic review design by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An exhaustive online literature search involving the databases PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar was conducted spanning the period between January 2010 and October 2023. Data were extracted from studies on regenerative medicine in urology with a special focus on efficacy and safety. Data from 16 studies were analyzed, which showed that cell therapy, biological materials, and tissue engineering are generally used in the field of urinary diseases. The main applications include the regeneration of urinary tissue, the correction of urinary incontinence, the treatment of erectile dysfunction, the reconstruction of ureteric defects, and the formation of bladder tissue. The study findings generally lack definitive conclusions on effectiveness and safety. While our results indicate that regenerative medicine is successful on a subjective level, more clinical trials are needed to establish its effectiveness and safety.
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.