Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,788 studies31 sourcesUpdated 24 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYJournal of clinical medicine

Post-Treatment Response and Safety of Stem Cell-Based Urethral Injection Therapy for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Shadha Nasser Mohammed Bahutair1
  • Sana Fathima2
  • Ketaki Devendra Tayade2
  • Areebah Akhter2
  • Rajani Dube1
  • Mohamedanas Mohamedfaruk Patni3
  • Rasha Aziz Attia Salama3
  1. 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, RAK College of Medical Sciences, Ras Al Khaimah Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al Khaimah P.O. Box 11172, United Arab Emirates
  2. 2RAK College of Medical Sciences, Ras Al Khaimah Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al Khaimah P.O. Box 11172, United Arab Emirates
  3. 3Department of Community and Family Medicine, RAK College of Medical Sciences, Ras Al Khaimah Medical and Health Sciences University, Ras Al Khaimah P.O. Box 11172, United Arab Emirates
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Cell-based therapies have been proposed as a regenerative treatment for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI), but their efficacy, safety, and optimal delivery characteristics remain uncertain. The aim of this review is to systematically evaluate the post-treatment clinical response and safety of cell-based injection therapies for female SUI and explore factors associated with post-treatment response. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 15 February 2026, and the search was subsequently updated through 25 April 2026 to identify newly published studies. Randomized controlled trials and prospective single-arm studies evaluating urethral injection of cell-based therapies in adult women with SUI were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool study-defined post-treatment response proportions. Subgroup analyses examined response definition, cell source, urinary incontinence type, ultrasound guidance, injection approach, and post-treatment physiotherapy. Continuous moderators were explored using univariable meta-regression. Placebo-controlled randomized trials reporting a common 12-month response endpoint were additionally pooled using risk ratios (RR). Results: Twenty-one studies involving 885 women were included. Seventeen studies contributed to the pooled post-treatment response analysis. The overall response proportion was 63.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 56.7–70.5%), with moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 62.6%). Exploratory subgroup analyses showed higher post-treatment response in ultrasound-guided cohorts than non-ultrasound-guided cohorts (78% vs. 57%; p < 0.001), in cohorts restricted to pure SUI compared with those including mixed urinary incontinence (76% vs. 55%; p < 0.001), and in cohorts incorporating post-treatment physiotherapy compared with those without physiotherapy (78% vs. 58%; p < 0.001). Two placebo-controlled randomized trials reporting ≥ 50% reduction in stress incontinence episode frequency at 12 months were included in an exploratory comparative meta-analysis. The analysis showed no significant difference between cell therapy and placebo (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85–1.23; p = 0.85). Reported adverse events were predominantly minor and transient, commonly comprising irritative urinary symptoms, urinary tract infection, and biopsy- or injection-site complications. Serious treatment-related adverse events were rare, and no treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusions: Stem cell-based injection therapy for female SUI is associated with encouraging post-treatment response rates and a generally favorable short- to medium-term safety profile. However, this estimate cannot be interpreted as treatment-specific efficacy. The available placebo-controlled randomized evidence did not demonstrate a higher 12-month response with cell therapy than placebo. Cell-based therapy should therefore remain investigational, pending adequately powered, controlled trials and long-term follow-up.

Related

  1. Staged buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty in the treatment of male urethral war injuries
    A. A. Kobirnichenko, V. V. Bondarchuk, F. E. Martins
    BMC UrologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineDOAJ
  2. Treatment of fecal incontinence and post-fistulotomy "keyhole" deformity with single-site autologous microfat and stromal vascular fraction grafting.
    André Araújo de Medeiros Silva, Priscilla Ornellas Neves, Carlos Ramon Silveira Mendes +4
    Annals of coloproctologyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textSurgery & anaesthesiaEurope PMCPMC
  3. ‘Efficacy and safety outcomes after slings or artificial urinary sphincter implantation for non-neurogenic male stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review’ for more clarity
    Cyrille Guillot-Tantay, Sabrina de Cillis, Paolo Geretto +6
    Frontiers in urologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. The relationship between endometrial cancer and urinary incontinence: systematic review
    Feda Mohammed Ali Al Saleh, Khalil Ibrahim Bograin, Amjad Saud Alaqil +8
    Frontiers in global women's healthPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  5. Artificial Intelligence in Eye Disease: A Systematic Review of Screening, Diagnosis, Prognosis, Treatment-Response Prediction, and Clinical Decision Support
    Manal M. Alharbi, Emtenan M. Alharbi, Alanoud Suliman Alsalamah +4
    Journal of Clinical MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textMedical imaging & radiologyCrossrefEurope PMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{bahutair2026posttreatment,
  title = {{Post-Treatment Response and Safety of Stem Cell-Based Urethral Injection Therapy for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis}},
  author = {Shadha Nasser Mohammed Bahutair and Sana Fathima and Ketaki Devendra Tayade and Areebah Akhter and Rajani Dube and Mohamedanas Mohamedfaruk Patni and Rasha Aziz Attia Salama},
  journal = {Journal of clinical medicine},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3390/jcm15197737},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13665857},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Post-Treatment Response and Safety of Stem Cell-Based Urethral Injection Therapy for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU  - Shadha Nasser Mohammed Bahutair
AU  - Sana Fathima
AU  - Ketaki Devendra Tayade
AU  - Areebah Akhter
AU  - Rajani Dube
AU  - Mohamedanas Mohamedfaruk Patni
AU  - Rasha Aziz Attia Salama
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/01
JO  - Journal of clinical medicine
DO  - 10.3390/jcm15197737
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13665857
AB  - Background/Objectives: Cell-based therapies have been proposed as a regenerative treatment for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI), but their efficacy, safety, and optimal delivery characteristics remain uncertain. The aim of this review is to systematically evaluate the post-treatment clinical response and safety of cell-based injection therapies for female SUI and explore factors associated with post-treatment response. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 15 February 2026, and the search was subsequently updated through 25 April 2026 to identify newly published studies. Randomized controlled trials and prospective single-arm studies evaluating urethral injection of cell-based therapies in adult women with SUI were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool study-defined post-treatment response proportions. Subgroup analyses examined response definition, cell source, urinary incontinence type, ultrasound guidance, injection approach, and post-treatment physiotherapy. Continuous moderators were explored using univariable meta-regression. Placebo-controlled randomized trials reporting a common 12-month response endpoint were additionally pooled using risk ratios (RR). Results: Twenty-one studies involving 885 women were included. Seventeen studies contributed to the pooled post-treatment response analysis. The overall response proportion was 63.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 56.7–70.5%), with moderate-to-substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 62.6%). Exploratory subgroup analyses showed higher post-treatment response in ultrasound-guided cohorts than non-ultrasound-guided cohorts (78% vs. 57%; p < 0.001), in cohorts restricted to pure SUI compared with those including mixed urinary incontinence (76% vs. 55%; p < 0.001), and in cohorts incorporating post-treatment physiotherapy compared with those without physiotherapy (78% vs. 58%; p < 0.001). Two placebo-controlled randomized trials reporting ≥ 50% reduction in stress incontinence episode frequency at 12 months were included in an exploratory comparative meta-analysis. The analysis showed no significant difference between cell therapy and placebo (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85–1.23; p = 0.85). Reported adverse events were predominantly minor and transient, commonly comprising irritative urinary symptoms, urinary tract infection, and biopsy- or injection-site complications. Serious treatment-related adverse events were rare, and no treatment-related deaths were reported. Conclusions: Stem cell-based injection therapy for female SUI is associated with encouraging post-treatment response rates and a generally favorable short- to medium-term safety profile. However, this estimate cannot be interpreted as treatment-specific efficacy. The available placebo-controlled randomized evidence did not demonstrate a higher 12-month response with cell therapy than placebo. Cell-based therapy should therefore remain investigational, pending adequately powered, controlled trials and long-term follow-up.
SN  - 2077-0383
ER  -