Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMedOpen access

Adipose-derived stromal cells for osteoarticular repair: trophic function versus stem cell activity.

Ruetze M., Richter W.

Narrative Review on Cartilage Damage, published in Expert Rev Mol Med (2014) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Narrative Review
Journal
Expert Rev Mol Med (2014)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
24810570
PMCID
PMC4017835
DOI
10.1017/erm.2014.9
Citations
40

Abstract (original English)

The identification of multipotent adipose-derived stromal cells (ASC) has raised hope that tissue regeneration approaches established with bone-marrow-derived stromal cells (BMSC) can be reproduced with a cell-type that is far more accessible in large quantities. Recent detailed comparisons, however, revealed subtle functional differences between ASC and BMSC, stressing the concept of a common mesenchymal progenitor existing in a perivascular niche across all tissues. Focussing on bone and cartilage repair, this review summarises recent in vitro and in vivo studies aiming towards tissue regeneration with ASC. Advantages of good accessibility, high yield and superior growth properties are counterbalanced by an inferiority of ASC to form ectopic bone and stimulate long-bone healing along with their less pronounced osteogenic and angiogenic gene expression signature. Hence, particular emphasis is placed on establishing whether stem cell activity of ASC is so far proven and relevant for successful osteochondral regeneration, or whether trophic activity may largely determine therapeutic outcome.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Adipose Tissue, WhiteAdult Stem CellsAnimalsAntigens, CDCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCell ShapeHumansRegeneration

Browse all related research

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

Related research