Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Contemporary application of autologous muscle-derived cells for urinary sphincter regeneration

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remains a prevalent condition with substantial economic and quality-of-life impact. Treatment for incontinence historically culminates with invasive surgical procedures with recognized complication profiles. Innovative directions for SUI therapeutics are on the horizon, including the utilization of adult autologous muscle-derived cells for urinary sphincter regeneration (AMDC-USR). Herein, we visit fundamental concepts of innovative regenerative medicine technologies for urologic applications.

Methods

Synopsis of contemporary literature review regarding adult autologous muscle-derived cells for urinary sphincter regeneration is presented.

Results

Current published literature presents safety and efficacy data regarding AMDC-USR injection in 80 patients at 12-month follow-up. In these early studies, no long-term adverse events were reported and patients undergoing cellular injection at higher doses revealed at least 50% reduction in stress leaks and pad weight at 12-month follow-up. All dose groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement in patient-reported incontinence-specific quality-of-life scores at 12-month follow-up. Conclusions from the pooled analyses indicate that injection of AMDC-USR across a range of dosages appears safe. Efficacy data suggest a dose response with more patients responsive to the higher doses of AMDC-USR.

Conclusion

Applications for utilization of autologous cellular therapies for treatment of SUI, and conceivably multiple additional indications, are approaching realization. Multiple Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled studies for AMDC-USR are concluding or ongoing to launch this regenerative option for the millions of patients who may ultimately benefit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Reynolds WS, Dmochowski RR, Penson DF (2011) Epidemiology of stress urinary incontinence in women. Curr Urol Rep 12(5):370–376

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Norton P, Brubaker L (2006) Urinary incontinence in women. Lancet 367(9504):57–67

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Danforth KN, Townsend MK, Lifford K, Curhan GC, Resnick NM, Grodstein F (2006) Risk factors for urinary incontinence among middle-aged women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194(2):339–345

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Petros PE, Woodman PJ (2008) The integral theory of continence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(1):35–40

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gill BC, Damaser MS, Vasavada SP, Goldman HB (2013) Stress incontinence in the era of regenerative medicine: reviewing the importance of the pudendal nerve. J Urol. 190(1):22–28

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Thompson I, Kaufman MR (2010) Nonsurgical interventions for incontinence: where is the evidence? Curr Blad Dysfn Rep 5(3):163–167

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kobashi KC, Albo ME, Dmochowski RR, Ginsberg DA, Goldman HB, Gomelsky A et al (2017) Surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol 198(4):875–883

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wood LN, Anger JT (2014) Urinary incontinence in women. BMJ 349:g4531

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. SUFU. https://sufuorg.com/docs/news/augs-sufu-mus-position-statement.aspx

  10. Koski ME, Chamberlain J, Rosoff J, Vaughan T, Kaufman MR, Winters JC et al (2014) Patient perception of transvaginal mesh and the media. Urology 84(3):575–582

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Athanasopoulos A, Gyftopoulos K, McGuire EJ (2011) Efficacy and preoperative prognostic factors of autologous fascia rectus sling for treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Urology 78(5):1034–1038

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Williams JK, Dean A, Badlani G, Andersson KE (2016) Regenerative medicine therapies for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 196(6):1619–1626

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Aragon IM, Imbroda BH, Lara MF (2018) Cell therapy clinical trials for stress urinary incontinence: current status and perspectives. Int J Med Sci 15(3):195–204

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Zambon JP, Williams KJ, Bennington J, Badlani GH (2019) Applicability of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in female patients. Neurourol Urodyn 38(Suppl 4):S76–S83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hwang K, Lewis S, Lamb DJ (2010) Stem cell research: implications for urology. AUA Upd Ser 29(8):77–84

    Google Scholar 

  16. Vinarov A, Atala A, Yoo J, Slusarenco R, Zhumataev M, Zhito A et al (2018) Cell therapy for stress urinary incontinence: present-day frontiers. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 12(2):e1108–e1121

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sun DZ, Abelson B, Babbar P, Damaser MS (2019) Harnessing the mesenchymal stem cell secretome for regenerative urology. Nat Rev Urol 16(6):363–375

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang HJ, Chuang YC, Chancellor MB (2011) Development of cellular therapy for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 22(9):1075–1083

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chancellor MB, Yokoyama T, Tirney S, Mattes CE, Ozawa H, Yoshimura N et al (2000) Preliminary results of myoblast injection into the urethra and bladder wall: a possible method for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence and impaired detrusor contractility. Neurourol Urodyn 19(3):279–287

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bennington J, Williams JK, Andersson KE (2019) New concepts in regenerative medicine approaches to the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Curr Opin Urol 29(4):380–384

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yokoyama T, Yoshimura N, Dhir R, Qu Z, Fraser MO, Kumon H et al (2001) Persistence and survival of autologous muscle derived cells versus bovine collagen as potential treatment of stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 165(1):271–276

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Furuta A, Jankowski RJ, Pruchnic R, Yoshimura N, Chancellor MB (2007) The promise of stem cell therapy to restore urethral sphincter function. Curr Urol Rep 8(5):373–378

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kwon D, Kim Y, Pruchnic R, Jankowski R, Usiene I, de Miguel F et al (2006) Periurethral cellular injection: comparison of muscle-derived progenitor cells and fibroblasts with regard to efficacy and tissue contractility in an animal model of stress urinary incontinence. Urology 68(2):449–454

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yiou R, Yoo JJ, Atala A (2003) Restoration of functional motor units in a rat model of sphincter injury by muscle precursor cell autografts. Transplantation 76(7):1053–1060

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Yokoyama T, Pruchnic R, Lee JY, Chuang YC, Jumon H, Yoshimura N et al (2001) Autologous primary muscle-derived cells transfer into the lower urinary tract. Tissue Eng 7(4):395–404

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chermansky CJ, Tarin T, Kwon DD, Jankowski RJ, Cannon TW, de Groat WC et al (2004) Intraurethral muscle-derived cell injections increase leak point pressure in a rat model of intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Urology 63(4):780–785

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cannon TW, Lee JY, Somogyi G, Pruchnic R, Smith CP, Huard J et al (2003) Improved sphincter contractility after allogenic muscle-derived progenitor cell injection into the denervated rat urethra. Urology 62(5):958–963

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee JY, Cannon TW, Pruchnic R, Fraser MO, Huard J, Chancellor MB (2003) The effects of periurethral muscle-derived stem cell injection on leak point pressure in a rat model of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14(1):31–37 (discussion 7)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kleinert S, Horton R (2008) Retraction–autologous myoblasts and fibroblasts versus collagen [corrected] for treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women: a [corrected] randomised controlled trial. Lancet 372(9641):789–790

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Carr LK, Steele D, Steele S, Wagner D, Pruchnic R, Jankowski R et al (2008) 1-year follow-up of autologous muscle-derived stem cell injection pilot study to treat stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(6):881–883

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Carr LK, Robert M, Kultgen PL, Herschorn S, Birch C, Murphy M et al (2013) Autologous muscle derived cell therapy for stress urinary incontinence: a prospective, dose ranging study. J Urol 189(2):595–601

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Peters KM, Dmochowski RR, Carr LK, Robert M, Kaufman MR, Sirls LT et al (2014) Autologous muscle derived cells for treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. J Urol 192(2):469–476

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Carr L, Tu LM, Robert M, Quinlan D, Carlson K, Herschorn S, Dmochowski R, Peters K, Kaufman M, Jankowski R, Chancellor M (ed) (2017) Autologous muscle derived cells for urinary sphincter repair for recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence after continence surgery. In: AUA annual meeting; 2017; Boston, MA

  34. Pruchnic RJR, Kaufman MR (ed) (2017) Lessons learned from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study of autologous muscle derived cells for urinary sphincter repair. In: International continence society annual meeting; 2017; Florence, Italy

  35. Quinlan D, Carr L, Tu LM, Robert M, Carlson K, Herschorn S, Dmochowski R, Peters K, Kaufman M, Jankowski R, Chancellor M (ed) (2017) Autologous muscle derived cells for urinary sphincter repair for recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence after continence surgery. In: IUGA; 2017; Vancouver, Canada

  36. Blaganje M, Lukanovic A (2012) Intrasphincteric autologous myoblast injections with electrical stimulation for stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 117(2):164–167

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Blaganje M, Lukanovic A (2013) Ultrasound-guided autologous myoblast injections into the extrinsic urethral sphincter: tissue engineering for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 24(4):533–535

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sebe P, Doucet C, Cornu JN, Ciofu C, Costa P, de Medina SG et al (2011) Intrasphincteric injections of autologous muscular cells in women with refractory stress urinary incontinence: a prospective study. Int Urogynecol J 22(2):183–189

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Elmi A, Kajbafzadeh AM, Tourchi A, Talab SS, Esfahani SA (2011) Safety, efficacy and health related quality of life of autologous myoblast transplantation for treatment of urinary incontinence in children with bladder exstrophy-epispadias complex. J Urol 186(5):2021–2026

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Stangel-Wojcikiewicz K, Jarocha D, Piwowar M, Jach R, Uhl T, Basta A et al (2014) Autologous muscle-derived cells for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a 2-year follow-up of a Polish investigation. Neurourol Urodyn 33(3):324–330

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Gras S, Klarskov N, Lose G (2014) Intraurethral injection of autologous minced skeletal muscle: a simple surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 192(3):850–855

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Gerullis H, Eimer C, Georgas E, Homburger M, El-Baz AG, Wishahi M et al (2012) Muscle-derived cells for treatment of iatrogenic sphincter damage and urinary incontinence in men. Sci World J 2012:898535

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Levanovich PE, Diokno A, Hasenau DL, Lajiness M, Pruchnic R, Chancellor MB (2015) Intradetrusor injection of adult muscle-derived cells for the treatment of underactive bladder: pilot study. Int Urol Nephrol 47(3):465–467

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Vanderbilt Medical Center, A-1302 Medical Center North, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA

    Melissa R. Kaufman

Authors
  1. Melissa R. Kaufman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MRK: Manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa R. Kaufman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

MR Kaufman serves as Global Principal Investigator for Cook Myosite, Inc.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed in the reviewed studies. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee for the reviewed articles and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the included studies.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaufman, M.R. Contemporary application of autologous muscle-derived cells for urinary sphincter regeneration. World J Urol 38, 2095–2099 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-03018-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-03018-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation