{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02782608695652174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.111111111111111, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Developing a tissue engineered repair material for treatment of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse—which cell source?

Synthetic non‐absorbable meshes are widely used to augment surgical repair of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP); however, there is growing concern such meshes are associated with serious complications. This study compares the potential of two autologous cell sources for attachment and extra‐cellular matrix (ECM) production on a biodegradable scaffold to develop tissue engineered repair material (TERM).