Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialPubMedOpen access

Adipose-Derived Cells (Stromal Vascular Fraction) Transplanted for Orthopedical or Neurological Purposes: Are They Safe Enough?

Siennicka K., Zolocinska A., Stepien K., Lubina-Dabrowska N., Maciagowska M., Zolocinska E.

Clinical Trial on Tendon Injury, Neuroinflammation, published in Stem Cells Int (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Clinical Trial
Journal
Stem Cells Int (2016)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
27698672
PMCID
PMC5028862
DOI
10.1155/2016/5762916
Citations
21

Abstract (original English)

Although mesenchymal stem cells are used in numerous clinical trials, the safety of their application is still a matter of concern. We have analysed the clinical results of the autologous adipose-derived stem cell treatment (stromal vascular fraction (SVF) containing adipose-derived stem cells, endothelial progenitors, and blood mononuclear cells) for orthopedic (cartilage, bone, tendon, or combined joint injuries) and neurologic (multiple sclerosis) diseases. Methods of adipose tissue collection, cell isolation and purification, and resulting cell numbers, viability, and morphology were considered, and patient's age, sex, disease type, and method of cell administration (cell numbers per single application, treatment numbers and frequency, and methods of cell implantation) were analysed and searched for the unwanted clinical effects. Results of cellular therapy were compared retrospectively to those obtained with conventional medication without SVF application. SVF transplantation was always the accessory treatment of patients receiving "standard routine" therapies of their diseases. Clinical experiments were approved by the Bioethical Medical Committees supervising the centers where patients were hospitalised. The conclusion of the study is that none of the treated patients developed any serious adverse event, and autologous mesenchymal stem (stromal) cell clinical application

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research