Department of Biochemistry, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Department of Urology, Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Eur Urol. 2017 Oct;72(4):594-606. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.03.026. Epub 2017 Apr 4.
Urethra repair by tissue engineering has been extensively studied in laboratory animals and patients, but is not routinely used in clinical practice.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
组织工程学在实验室动物和患者中已广泛研究用于尿道修复,但在临床实践中尚未常规使用。
系统调查组织工程学修复尿道的临床前和临床疗效证据,以激发临床前研究向临床的转化。
在 PubMed 和 EMBASE 上应用了系统检索策略。两名评审员独立筛选研究的相关性,最终纳入 80 项临床前研究和 23 项临床研究,其中 63 项和 13 项分别进行荟萃分析以评估副作用、功能和研究完成情况。分别对临床前和临床研究进行分析。完整环形和镶嵌程序独立评估。评估的参数包括细胞接种和生物材料类型。
荟萃分析显示,细胞接种可显著降低临床前研究中发生副作用的概率。然而,值得注意的是,细胞仅在临床中稀疏使用(23 项研究中的 4 项),并未显著降低副作用。在 23 项临床研究中,有 21 项使用了脱细胞模板,而在临床前研究中,其他生物材料也显示出了有前景的结果。由于随机对照研究的数量有限,无法与当前的临床实践进行直接比较。
由于缺乏对照(临床前)研究,无法确定组织工程修复尿道的疗效。荟萃分析的结果与文献中描述的当前治疗选择相似。令人惊讶的是,似乎有利的临床前结果,即细胞的纳入,并未转化为临床。改进(临床前)研究设计可能会增强临床转化。
我们回顾了所有关于尿道组织工程学的可用文献,以评估临床前和临床研究中的疗效。我们表明,需要改进(临床前)研究设计,以提高组织工程技术的临床转化。