Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Advancements in mesenchymal stem cell therapy for chronic wounds: challenges, innovations, and future directions

Tang Y., Su T., Huang B., Xu Q., Chen Q., Zhang S.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, Immune Modulation, published in Front Cell Dev Biol (2025) — 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
Front Cell Dev Biol (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41602831
PMCID
PMC12832901
DOI
10.3389/fcell.2025.1730032

Abstract (original English)

The management of chronic wounds remains challenging due to their complex pathophysiology, poor response to conventional therapies, and significant impact on patients' quality of life. mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have garnered attention as a potential treatment due to their regenerative and immunomodulatory properties. This review summarizes preclinical and clinical advancements in MSC-based therapies for chronic wound healing. MSCs promote tissue regeneration through various mechanisms, including differentiation into skin cell lineages, modulation of inflammation, angiogenesis, and paracrine release of bioactive factors. Current research focuses on identifying viable MSC sources, optimizing delivery methods, and understanding their mechanisms for clinical use. Despite progress, challenges remain, including inconsistent results, poor MSC survival in the wound microenvironment, and variability in regenerative capacity across MSC sources. Future research should focus on developing standardized guidelines for MSC preparation and conducting long-term randomized trials to assess safety, efficacy, and potential risks. In conclusion, this review highlights current evidence and identifies key challenges for the clinical application of MSCs in chronic wound healing.

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research