ArticlePloS one2025
In vivo biocompatibility and long-term durability of nanofibrillated cellulose as a urethral bulking agent in rats and Beagle dogs.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regenerative Medicine Approaches to Stress Urinary Incontinence.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Assessment of Migration of the Urethral Bulking Agent Zhoabex GInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCystoscopy-assisted submucosal injections of urethral bulking agents offer a safe and efficient alternative to surgery for treating urinary incontinence in both dogs and women. To address the concern of their transient therapeutic effect, a preclinical study evaluating the biocompatibility, safety, and durability of nanofibrillated cellulose as a bulking agent was designed. Plant-based nanofibrillated cellulose is considered renewable, biocompatible, and non-degradable in vivo. To the best of our knowledge, no studies of nanofibrillated cellulose injected into the urethral wall of experimental animals have been published to date.
methodsAfter assessing the rheological behavior of nanofibrillated cellulose, a biocompatibility study with 50 rats and a durability study with two Beagle dogs were conducted. In anesthesized rats, deposits of either nanofibrillated cellulose or sodium chloride as an inert control were injected into the urethral wall via a caudal laparotomy. The rats were euthanized for histopathological assessment after 7, 30, and 90 days. In dogs, cystoscopy-assisted injections of nanofibrillated cellulose were followed with magnetic resonance imaging at 14 days and at 2, 3, 6, and 12 months.
resultsThe rheological studies demonstrated a gel-like behavior under a wide range of shear stress. Nanofibrillated cellulose induced a moderate host tissue response according to the EN ISO 10993-6 standard, consisting primarily of macrophages, foreign body giant cells, lymphocytes, and plasma cells. No significant difference was observed in the tissue response at different time points. In dogs, the bulking agent was visible in 4/5 (80%) injection sites on magnetic resonance imaging at 12 months post-injection. No signs of migration, abscess formation or any major or long-term complications were observed.
conclusionsNanofibrillated cellulose maintains a chronic but stable and tolerable inflammatory response for up to 90 days in the urethral wall of rats. Durability in the urethral wall of dogs indicates a potential long-term effect.
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.