Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

Assessing the Bone-Forming Potential of Pericytes.

Meyers CA., Wang C., Xu J., Pan HC., Shen J., Ting K.

Narrative Review on Back & Spine, published in Methods Mol Biol (2021) — 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
Methods Mol Biol (2021)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
33576974
DOI
10.1007/978-1-0716-1056-5_9

Abstract (original English)

Human pericytes are a perivascular cell population with mesenchymal stem cell properties, present in all vascularized tissues. Human pericytes have a distinct immunoprofile, which may be leveraged for purposes of cell purification. Adipose tissue is the most commonly used cell source for human pericyte derivation. Pericytes can be isolated by FACS (fluorescence-activated cell sorting), most commonly procured from liposuction aspirates. Pericytes have clonal multilineage differentiation potential, and their potential utility for bone regeneration has been described across multiple animal models. The following review will discuss in vivo methods for assessing the bone-forming potential of purified pericytes. Potential models include (1) mouse intramuscular implantation, (2) mouse calvarial defect implantation, and (3) rat spinal fusion models. In addition, the presented surgical protocols may be used for the in vivo analysis of other osteoprogenitor cell types.

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 TissueAnimalsBone Marrow CellsBone RegenerationCell DifferentiationCell LineCell SeparationHumansMesenchymal Stem CellsMice

Browse all related research

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

Related research