ArticleJournal of stem cells & regenerative medicine2025
Ureter reconstruction using a biotube in a canine model: A pilot stud.
Article in Journal of stem cells & regenerative medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Biotube/Biosheet as a collagen-based scaffold for vaginal reconstruction: evaluation in a rat model.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Editorial Commentary: Toward Off-the-Shelf Ureteral Substitutes Using iBTA "Biotubes".Journal of stem cells & regenerative medicine · 2025Article
- A hybrid combination ofFrontiers in urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ureteral injuries can lead to renal dysfunction, and conventional treatments such as ureteral stents and autologous tissue grafts have limitations. This study aimed to evaluate the biocompatibility of a "biotube" created using in-body tissue architecture (iBTA) technology for ureteral reconstruction in a canine model. Methods: Biotubes were implanted in dogs to replace a segment of the ureter. Ureteral stents were used to prevent obstruction. Autopsies were performed 2-3 months after implantation, and the implantation sites were examined histologically to assess tissue regeneration, vascularization, and potential inflammatory reactions. Results: Ureteral stenting effectively prevented obstruction and ensured adequate urinary flow during the observation period. All biotubes were significantly shortened after implantation. No signs of inflammation or foreign body reactions were recorded, indicating good biocompatibility. Although epithelial cell invasion was observed, muscle tissue migration and angiogenesis were limited. Conclusions: Biotubes demonstrate potential as temporary ureteral substitutes; however, improvements in epithelialization and muscle tissue migration are necessary for successful long-term ureteral regeneration. Further experimental studies are required to evaluate their clinical utility as scaffold materials for ureteral reconstruction.
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.