| Literature DB >> 29024555 |
Jan Adamowicz1, Marta Pokrywczynska1, Shane Vontelin Van Breda2, Tomasz Kloskowski1, Tomasz Drewa1.
Abstract
Regenerative medicine is a new branch of medicine based on tissue engineering technology. This rapidly developing field of science offers revolutionary treatment strategy aimed at urinary bladder regeneration. Despite many promising announcements of experimental urinary bladder reconstruction, there has been a lack in commercialization of therapies based on current investigations. This is due to numerous obstacles that are slowly being identified and precisely overcome. The goal of this review is to present the current status of research on urinary bladder regeneration and highlight further challenges that need to be gradually addressed. We put an emphasis on expectations of urologists that are awaiting tissue engineering based solutions in clinical practice. This review also presents a detailed characteristic of obstacles on the road to successful urinary bladder regeneration from urological clinician perspective. A defined interdisciplinary approach might help to accelerate planning transitional research tissue engineering focused on urinary tracts. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2017;6:2033-2043.Entities:
Keywords: Regeneration; Stem cells; Translational medicine; Urinary bladder; Urology
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29024555 PMCID: PMC6430044 DOI: 10.1002/sctm.17-0101
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Stem Cells Transl Med ISSN: 2157-6564 Impact factor: 6.940
Figure 1Indications for cystectomy with subsequently performed urine diversion comprise malignant and nonmalignant conditions. Invasive bladder cancer is the most common of them. Tissue engineering strategies included noncellular (A) and cellular (B) grafts, developed for bladder replacement.
Figure 2Type of biomaterials used for urinary bladder regeneration in 141 patients. Indications for bladder reconstruction and applied material for augmentation among 141 cases does not indicate any variability of data. Abbreviations: BAM, bladder acellular matrix; BP, bovine pericardium; FPDB, formalin preserved dog bladder; GS, gelatin sponge; JP, Japanese paper; LHD, lyophilized human dura; PGA, polyglycoic acid; PLA, polylactic acid; PM, plastic mold; SIS, small intestinal submucosa.
Figure 3Indications for urinary bladder reconstruction in 141 patients treated by tissue engineering methods. Indications for bladder reconstruction and applied material for augmentation among 141 cases does not indicate any variability of data.
Clinical studies using cell seeded grafts for human urinary bladder regeneration
| Atala (2006) | Joseph (2014) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | 4 | 3 | 10 |
| Patients age (years) | 4–19 | 4–19 | 3–21 |
| Indication for augmentation cystoplasty | Neurogenic bladder myelomeningocele | Neurogenic bladder myelomeningocele | Neurogenic bladder spina bifida |
| Biomaterial | BAM | C/PGA | PGA/PLA |
| Type and number of cells | UCs (50 × 106/cm3) SMCs (50 × 106/cm3) | UCs (50 × 106/cm3) SMCs (50 × 106/cm3) | UCs (no data) SMCs (no data) |
| Omental wrapping, number of patients | 1 | 3 | 10 |
| Bladder cycling technique | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Follow‐up (months) | 22–61 | 22–61 | 12–36 |
| Postoperatively increased bladder capacity | No | Yes | No |
| Postoperatively improved bladder compliance | No | Yes | No |
| Adverse events | No adverse events | No adverse events |
Bowel obstruction |
| Conversion to traditional ileocystoplasty, number of patients | 0 | 0 | 5 |
Abbreviations: BAM, bladder acellular matrix; PGA, polyglycolic acid; PLA, polylactic acid; SMCs, smooth muscle cells; UCs, urothelial cells.