ArticleScientific reports2024
Autologous micrografting improves regeneration of tissue-engineered urinary conduits in vivo.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reply to: Comment on "Single-staged in vivo co-transplantation of autologous muscular and urothelial micrografts as a composite tissue tube for urogenital reconstruction".Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Single-staged in vivo co-transplantation of autologous muscular and urothelial micrografts as a composite tissue tube for urogenital reconstruction.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Recent advances and future directions in urinary system tissue engineering.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Uterine Repair Mechanisms Are Potentiated by Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Decellularized Tissue Grafts Through ElevatedBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urogenital reconstructive malformation surgery is sometimes hampered by lack of tissue for the repair. We have previously shown that autologous micrografting allows for single-staged scaffold cellularization after surgical implantation. Here, a collagen-based scaffold reinforced with biodegradable mesh and a stent was implanted as a bladder conduit in ten full-grown female minipigs. We aimed to assess short-term regenerative outcomes, safety, and feasibility of implanting tubular urinary micrografted scaffolds versus acellular controls. Five scaffolds were embedded with autologous urothelial micrografts harvested perioperatively. After six weeks, all animals were assessed by cystoscopy, CT-urography, and microanatomical assessment of the urinary conduits. The procedure proved technically feasible within the confines of a regular surgical theater, with duration-times comparable to corresponding conventional procedures. No animals experienced postoperative complications, and all implanted conduits were patent at follow-up. Improved tissue regeneration was observed in the micrografted conduits compared with the acellular controls, including increased luminal epithelialization, increased cell proliferation, decreased cell apoptosis, and increased conduit vascularization. We concluded that single-staged on-site construction and implantation of tissue engineered urinary conduits proved feasible and safe, with improved regenerative potentials in micrografted conduits. This study presents a new approach to urinary conduits, and merits further investigations for advancement towards clinical translation.
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.