Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Oct;72(4):594-606.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.026. Epub 2017 Apr 4.

Tissue Engineering of the Urethra: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Tissue Engineering of the Urethra: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Luuk R M Versteegden et al. Eur Urol. 2017 Oct.

Abstract

Context: Urethra repair by tissue engineering has been extensively studied in laboratory animals and patients, but is not routinely used in clinical practice.

Objective: To systematically investigate preclinical and clinical evidence of the efficacy of tissue engineering for urethra repair in order to stimulate translation of preclinical studies to the clinic.

Evidence acquisition: A systematic search strategy was applied in PubMed and EMBASE. Studies were independently screened for relevance by two reviewers, resulting in 80 preclinical and 23 clinical studies of which 63 and 13 were selected for meta-analysis to assess side effects, functionality, and study completion. Analyses for preclinical and clinical studies were performed separately. Full circumferential and inlay procedures were assessed independently. Evaluated parameters included seeding of cells and type of biomaterial.

Evidence synthesis: Meta-analysis revealed that cell seeding significantly reduced the probability of encountering side effects in preclinical studies. Remarkably though, cells were only sparsely used in the clinic (4/23 studies) and showed no significant reduction of side effects. ln 21 out of 23 clinical studies, decellularized templates were used, while in preclinical studies other biomaterials showed promising outcomes as well. No direct comparison to current clinical practice could be made due to the limited number of randomized controlled studies.

Conclusions: Due to a lack of controlled (pre)clinical studies, the efficacy of tissue engineering for urethra repair could not be determined. Meta-analysis outcome measures were similar to current treatment options described in literature. Surprisingly, it appeared that favorable preclinical results, that is inclusion of cells, were not translated to the clinic. Improved (pre)clinical study designs may enhance clinical translation.

Patient summary: We reviewed all available literature on urethral tissue engineering to assess the efficacy in preclinical and clinical studies. We show that improvements to (pre)clinical study design is required to improve clinical translation of tissue engineering technologies.

Keywords: Clinical studies; Meta-analysis; Preclinical studies; Reconstructive surgery; Systematic review; Tissue engineering; Urethra.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

LinkOut - more resources