[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-455603-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-455603-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","comparative-analysis-of-vehicles-for-the-regeneration-of-mouse-endometrial-damage-model","Comparative Analysis of Vehicles for the Regeneration of Mouse Endometrial Damage Model","","Endometrial damage contributes to infertility, especially in patients with refractory thin endometrium or intrauterine adhesions, making regenerative therapies a clinical priority. This study compares two treatment vehicles in an ethanol-induced mouse endometrial damage model: direct injection of endometrial stromal cells (EMSCs) and transplantation using a small intestinal submucosa (SIS)-based EMSC patch. Histology assessed endometrial thickness, gland regeneration, and fibrosis reduction. Both approaches supported regeneration, but the SIS-based patch produced significantly better restoration and reduced fibrotic changes. The findings support scaffold-assisted cell therapy as a promising strategy, while highlighting the need for clinical optimization.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparative-analysis-of-vehicles-for-the-regeneration-of-mouse-endometrial-damage-model/455603/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparative-analysis-of-vehicles-for-the-regeneration-of-mouse-endometrial-damage-model/455603.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Ezra","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",13,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What endometrial damage model was used in the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"A mouse model of endometrial damage was created by injecting ethanol into the uterine horn.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How do the two treatment approaches differ?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"One approach uses direct injection of endometrial stromal cells (EMSCs) into the damaged endometrium, while the other delivers EMSCs via an SIS-based patch.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which therapy performed better in promoting endometrial repair?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The SIS-based EMSC patch showed significantly greater improvements in endometrial thickness, gland formation, and fibrosis reduction compared with direct EMSC injection.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},455603,1790957455,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":107,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":124,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1099514068035,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Tissue Eng Regen Med (2026) 23(1):175–184 Online ISSN 2212-5469  \n[https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-025-00761-6](https://doi.org/10.1007/s13770-025-00761-6)  \nORIGINAL ARTICLE  \nComparative Analysis of Vehicles for the Regeneration of Mouse Endometrial Damage Model  \nJi Yeon Han1,2 • Yoon Young Kim1,3 • Bo Bin Choi1 • Sung Woo Kim1,2,3 • Seung-Yup Ku1,2,3  \nReceived: 5 June 2025/Revised: 31 July 2025/Accepted: 11 August 2025/Published online: 6 September 2025  \n􀀂 The Author(s) 2025  \nAbstract  \nBACKGROUND: Endometrial damage is a critical factor contributing to infertility, particularly in women with refractory thin endometrium or intrauterine adhesions. Therefore, developing innovative therapeutic strategies for endometrial regeneration is essential. This study evaluates the regenerative potential of endometrial stromal cell (EMSC) injection and EMSC-loaded patch application in a mouse model with ethanol-induced endometrial damage.  \nMETHODS: A mouse model of endometrial damage was established using ethanol injection into the uterine horn. EMSCs were isolated, cultured, and either HA-injected into the damaged endometrium or transplanted via a small intestinal submucosa (SIS)-based EMSC patch. Histological analyses were performed to assess endometrial thickness, gland regeneration, and fibrosis reduction.  \nRESULTS: Both EMSC injection and SIS-based EMSC patch engraftment promoted endometrial regeneration. However, the SIS-based EMSC patch group exhibited significant improvements in endometrial thickness, gland formation, and fibrosis reduction compared to the EMSC injection group.  \nCONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the superior regenerative potential of an SIS-based EMSC patch over direct EMSC injection for endometrial repair. The findings suggest that scaffold-assisted cell therapy could be a promising approach for treating endometrial damage-related infertility. Further studies are required to optimize this strategy for clinical applications.  \nKeywords Endometrial regeneration 􀀂 Stem cell therapy 􀀂 Intrauterine adhesion 􀀂 Infertility  \nJi Yeon Han and Yoon Young Kim authors equally contributed to this work.  \n& Seung-Yup Ku [jyhsyk@snu.ac.kr](jyhsyk@snu.ac.kr)  \n1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea  \n2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul 03080, Korea  \n3 Institute of Reproductive Medicine and Population, Medical Research Center, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea  \n1 Introduction  \nAs the average age of women who marry and conceive continues to rise in some developed countries, infertility has emerged as a pressing social concern. In vitro fertilization (IVF) technology has advanced significantly since its inception in 1978, yielding notable improvements in outcomes. However, several challenges in IVF remain unresolved.  \nThe endometrium, the inner epithelial layer of the uterus, consists of a basal layer and a functional layer. The basal layer contains endometrial stem cells essential for regenerating the functional layer. Endometrial decidualization is a critical process for the implantation of fertilized  \nembryos and is fundamental to achieving a successful pregnancy [1] . Damage to the basal layer compromises the regenerative capacity of the endometrium, often resulting in conditions such as refractory thin endometrium or intrauterine adhesions, which contribute to recurrent implantation failure.  \nRefractory thin endometrium, often defined as an endometrial thickness below 7 mm, is widely recognized as a significant risk factor for poor IVF outcomes, though its definition remains ambiguous. Various strategies, including the use of plasma-rich plasma (PRP), low-dose aspirin, and vaginal sildenafil, have been explored to improve IVF outcomes in women with thin endometrium; however, their effectiveness in enhancing clinical pregnancy or live birth rates remains controversial and warrants further investigation [","cbCaihAnsi4TGCD4","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihAnsi4TGCD4","pdf",2790063,"English","# Abstract\n# Background\n# Methods\n# Results\n# Conclusions\n# Introduction\n## Endometrial structure and regenerative role\n## Refractory thin endometrium and IVF challenges\n## Intrauterine adhesions and limitations of conventional therapy\n## Need for improved endometrial regeneration models and therapies","[{\"question\":\"What endometrial damage model was used in the study?\",\"answer\":\"A mouse model of endometrial damage was created by injecting ethanol into the uterine horn.\"},{\"question\":\"How do the two treatment approaches differ?\",\"answer\":\"One approach uses direct injection of endometrial stromal cells (EMSCs) into the damaged endometrium, while the other delivers EMSCs via an SIS-based patch.\"},{\"question\":\"Which therapy performed better in promoting endometrial repair?\",\"answer\":\"The SIS-based EMSC patch showed significantly greater improvements in endometrial thickness, gland formation, and fibrosis reduction compared with direct EMSC injection.\"}]","Comparative Analysis of Vehicles for the Regeneration of Mouse Endometrial Damage Model | PDF",1790743552,25]