Skip to main content
Log in

In vivo bladder regeneration using small intestinal submucosa: experimental study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Surgery International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Significant side effects are correlated with bladder augmentation. Recently, small intestinal submucosa (SIS) has been proposed for clinical use. The efficacy of SIS bladder regeneration was studied in a porcine experimental model. Partial cystectomy (40–60% of bladder wall) was performed and replaced by SIS graft. Animals were planned to be killed at 2 weeks, 5 weeks and 3 months. Bladder capacity at 40 cmH2O pressure and macroscopic graft morphology were assessed before and after SIS implant. Histological examination was carried out with computer assisted morphometric analysis for collagen/smooth muscle ratio. Student’s t test was adopted for statistical analysis. Two piglets died on the 9th and 10th post-operative day due to urinary peritonitis. The remaining piglets were killed after uneventful post-operative period at 5 weeks (two animals) and 3 months (two animals). The bladder capacity was reduced (−18%) at the 5 week follow-up and quite similar to the pre-operative volume (+2.5%) at the 3 months control. No diverticular formation, bladder calculi, mucus and urinary infection were found. The SIS graft resulted not significantly contracted. Histology at 10 days showed SIS membrane lined by transitional epithelium islands with some capillaries. At 5 weeks, transitional epithelium was fully covering the graft; new blood vessels and fibroblasts with smooth muscle cells were observed. At 3 months, the SIS was not evident. Two layers were defined: inner transitional epithelium, outer collagen with fibroblasts and muscular bundles. Computer assisted morphometric analysis showed collagen/muscle ratio 70/30% (normal bladder=56/44%, P<0.05). The SIS was effective as a scaffold for bladder wall regeneration in four out of six animals. Long-term studies are required to confirm the efficacy of the newly developed wall and for eventual clinical use.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mitchell ME, Gonzales R, Cabral BH, Bauer SB, Gearhart JP, Filmer RB (1987) Bladder augmentation problems in neurovesical dysfunction. Dial Pediatr Urol 10:1

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gleeson MJ, Griffith DP (1992) The use of alloplastic biomaterials in bladder substitution. J Urol 148:1377

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cartwright PC, Snow BW (1989) Bladder autoaugmentation: partial detrusor excision to augment the bladder without the use of bowel. J Urol 142:1050

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kropp BP, Pope JC IV (1997) Small intestinal submucosa: a novel substance for the study of cellular interaction and regeneration in the bladder. Dial Pediatr Urol 20 10:2

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kropp BP, Eppley BL, Prevel CD, Harruff RC, Badylak SF, Adams MC, Rink RC, Keating MA (1994) Experimental assessment of Small Intestine Submucosa as a bladder wall substitute. J Urol 151:501

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kropp BP, Eppley BL, Prevel CD, Harruff RC, Badylak SF, Adams MC, Rink RC, Keating MA (1995) Experimental assessment of Small Intestine Submucosa as a bladder wall substitute. Urology 46(3):396

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pope JC IV, Davis MM, Smith ER Jr, Walsh MJ, Ellison PK, Rink PC, Kropp BP (1997) The ontogeny of canine Small Intestinal Submucosa Regenerated Bladder. J Urol 158(3):1105–1110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lantz GC, Badylak SF, Coffey AC, Gaddes LA, Sandusky GE (1990) Small Intestinal Submucosa as a small-diameter arterial graft in the dog. J Invest Surg 3:217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lantz GC, Badylak SF, Coffey AC, Gaddes LA, Sandusky GE (1992) Small Intestinal Submucosa as a superior vena cava graft in the dog. J Surg Res 53:175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gonzales R, Buson H, Ried C, Reinberg Y (1994) Seromuscolar colocystoplasty lined with urothelium: experimental study. Urology 44:743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Marte A, Di Meglio D, Cotrufo AM, Di Iorio G, De Pasquale M, Vessella A (2002) A long-term follow-up of autoaugmentation in myelodysplastic children. BJU Int 89(9):928

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Tizzoni G, Poggi A (1898) Die Wiederherstellung der Harnblase: experimentelle Untersuchungen. Zcentrabl Chir 15:921

    Google Scholar 

  13. Atala A (2004) Tissue engineering for replacement of organ function in the genito-urinary system. Am J Transplant 6(Suppl 4):58–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang Y, Kropp BP, Lin HK, Cowan R, Cheng EY (2004) Bladder regeneration with cell-seeded small intestinal submucosa. Tissue Eng 10(1–2):181–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kropp PM, Lingeman JE, Siegel YL, Badylak SF, Demeter RJ (1994) Biocompatibility fo Small Intestinal Submucosa in urinary tract as augmentation cystoplasty graft and injectable suspension. J Endourol 8:125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kropp BP, Rippy MK, Balylak SF, Adams MC, Keating MA, Rink RC, Thor KB (1996) Regenerative urinary bladder augmentation using Small Intestinal Submucosa: urodynamic and histopathologic assessment in long-term canine bladder augmentation. J Urol 155(6):2098

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kropp BP, Sawyer BD, Shannon HE, Rippy MK, Balylak SF, Adams MC, Keating MA, Rink RC, Thor KB (1996) Characterization of small intestinal submucosa regenerated canine detrusor: assessment of reinnervation in vitro compliance and contractility. J Urol 156(25):599–607

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Vaught JD, Kropp BP, Sawyer BD, Rippy MK, Badylak SF, Shannon HE, Thor KB (1996) Detrusor regeneration in the rat using porcine Small Intestinal Submucosal graft: functional innervation and receptor expression. J Urol 155(1):374–378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Conner RC, Patel RV, Steinberg GD (2001) Successful repair of a uretero-neobladder stricture using porcine small intestine submucosa. J Urol 165(6):1995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Paterson RF, Lifshitz DA, Beck SD, Siqueira TM Jr, Cheng L, Lingeman JE, Shalhav AL (2002) Multilayered small intestinal submucosa is inferior to autologous bowel for laparoscopic bladder augmentation. J Urol 168(5):2253–2257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chung SY, Krivorov NP, Rausei V, Thomas L, Frantzen M, Landsittel D, Kang YM, Chon CH, Christopher S, Fuchs G (2005) Bladder reconstitution with bone marrow derived stem cells seeded on small intestinal submucosa improves morphological and molecular composition. J Urol 174(1):353–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rink RC, Kropp BP (2003) Personal communication

  23. Metwalli AR, Colvert Jr III, Kropp BP (2003) Tissue engineering in urology: where are we going? Curr Urol Rep 4(2):156–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Caione.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caione, P., Capozza, N., Zavaglia, D. et al. In vivo bladder regeneration using small intestinal submucosa: experimental study. Ped Surgery Int 22, 593–599 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-006-1705-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-006-1705-9

Keywords

Navigation