@article{BurnsGoldsteinNewgreenetal.2016,
  author    = {Burns, Alan J. and Goldstein, Allan M. and Newgreen, Donald F. and Stamp, Lincon and Sch{\"a}fer, Karl-Herbert and Metzger, Marco and Hotta, Ryo and Young, Heather M. and Andrews, Peter W. and Thapar, Nikhil and Belkind-Gerson, Jaime and Bondurand, Nadege and Bornstein, Joel C. and Chan, Wood Yee and Cheah, Kathryn and Gershon, Michael D. and Heuckeroth, Robert O. and Hofstra, Robert M.W. and Just, Lothar and Kapur, Raj P. and King, Sebastian K. and McCann, Conor J. and Nagy, Nandor and Ngan, Elly and Obermayr, Florian and Pachnis, Vassilis and Pasricha, Pankaj J. and Sham, Mai Har and Tam, Paul and Vanden Berghe, Pieter},
  title     = {White paper on guidelines concerning enteric nervous system stem cell therapy for enteric neuropathies},
  series = {Developmental Biology},
  volume    = {417},
  journal   = {Developmental Biology},
  number    = {2},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.ydbio.2016.04.001},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-187415},
  pages     = {229-251},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Over the last 20 years, there has been increasing focus on the development of novel stem cell based therapies for the treatment of disorders and diseases affecting the enteric nervous system (ENS) of the gastrointestinal tract (so-called enteric neuropathies). Here, the idea is that ENS progenitor/stem cells could be transplanted into the gut wall to replace the damaged or absent neurons and glia of the ENS. This White Paper sets out experts' views on the commonly used methods and approaches to identify, isolate, purify, expand and optimize ENS stem cells, transplant them into the bowel, and assess transplant success, including restoration of gut function. We also highlight obstacles that must be overcome in order to progress from successful preclinical studies in animal models to ENS stem cell therapies in the clinic.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ZwinkJenetzkySchmiedekeetal.2012,
  author    = {Zwink, Nadine and Jenetzky, Ekkehart and Schmiedeke, Eberhard and Schmidt, Dominik and M{\"a}rzheuser, Schmidt and Grasshoff-Derr, Sabine and Holland-Cunz, Stefan and Weih, Sandra and Hosie, Stuart and Reifferscheid, Peter and Ameis, Helen and Kujath, Christina and Rissmann, Anke and Obermayr, Florian and Schwarzer, Nicole and Bartels, Enrika and Reutter, Heiko and Brenner, Hermann},
  title     = {Assisted reproductive techniques and the risk of anorectal malformations: a German case-control study},
  series = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases},
  number    = {65},
  organization    = {CURE-Net Consortium},
  doi       = {10.1186/1750-1172-7-65},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-134036},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Background: The use of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) for treatment of infertility is increasing rapidly worldwide. However, various health effects have been reported including a higher risk of congenital malformations. Therefore, we assessed the risk of anorectal malformations (ARM) after in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Methods: Data of the German Network for Congenital Uro-REctal malformations (CURE-Net) were compared to nationwide data of the German IVF register and the Federal Statistical Office (DESTATIS). Odds ratios (95\% confidence intervals) were determined to quantify associations using multivariable logistic regression accounting for potential confounding or interaction by plurality of births. Results: In total, 295 ARM patients born between 1997 and 2011 in Germany, who were recruited through participating pediatric surgeries from all over Germany and the German self-help organisation SoMA, were included. Controls were all German live-births (n = 10,069,986) born between 1997 and 2010. Overall, 30 cases (10\%) and 129,982 controls (1\%) were born after IVF or ICSI, which translates to an odds ratio (95\% confidence interval) of 8.7 (5.9-12.6) between ART and ARM in bivariate analyses. Separate analyses showed a significantly increased risk for ARM after IVF (OR, 10.9; 95\% CI, 6.2-19.0; P < 0.0001) as well as after ICSI (OR, 7.5; 95\% CI, 4.6-12.2; P < 0.0001). Furthermore, separate analyses of patients with isolated ARM, ARM with associated anomalies and those with a VATER/VACTERL association showed strong associations with ART (ORs 4.9, 11.9 and 7.9, respectively). After stratification for plurality of birth, the corresponding odds ratios (95\% confidence intervals) were 7.7 (4.6-12.7) for singletons and 4.9 (2.4-10.1) for multiple births. Conclusions: There is a strongly increased risk for ARM among children born after ART. Elevations of risk were seen after both IVF and ICSI. Further, separate analyses of patients with isolated ARM, ARM with associated anomalies and those with a VATER/VACTERL association showed increased risks in each group. An increased risk of ARM was also seen among both singletons and multiple births.},
  language  = {en}
}