4.4 Review

Human urinary bladder regeneration through tissue engineering - An analysis of 131 clinical cases

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
Volume 239, Issue 3, Pages 264-271

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1535370213517615

Keywords

Clinical research; reconstruction; regeneration; urinary bladder; tissue engineering

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Replacement of urinary bladder tissue with functional equivalents remains one of the most challenging problems of reconstructive urology over the last several decades. The gold standard treatment for urinary diversion after radical cystectomy is the ileal conduit or neobladder; however, this technique is associated with numerous complications including electrolyte imbalances, mucus production, and the potential for malignant transformation. Tissue engineering techniques provide the impetus to construct functional bladder substitutes de novo. Within this review, we have thoroughly perused the literature utilizing PubMed in order to identify clinical studies involving bladder reconstruction utilizing tissue engineering methodologies. The idea of urinary bladder regeneration through tissue engineering dates back to the 1950s. Many natural and synthetic biomaterials such as plastic mold, gelatin sponge, Japanese paper, preserved dog bladder, lyophilized human dura, bovine pericardium, small intestinal submucosa, bladder acellular matrix, or composite of collagen and polyglycolic acid were used for urinary bladder regeneration with a wide range of outcomes. Recent progress in the tissue engineering field suggest that in vitro engineered bladder wall substitutes may have expanded clinical applicability in near future but preclinical investigations on large animal models with defective bladders are necessary to optimize the methods of bladder reconstruction by tissue engineering in humans.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available