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

Bioactive Molecules for Skin Repair and Regeneration: Progress and Perspectives

Chen D., Hou Q., Zhong L., Zhao Y., Li M., Fu X.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, published in Stem Cells Int (2019) — 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
Stem Cells Int (2019)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
32082386
PMCID
PMC7012201
DOI
10.1155/2019/6789823
Citations
24

Abstract (original English)

Skin regeneration is a vexing problem in the field of regenerative medicine. A bioactive molecule-based strategy has been frequently used in skin wound healing in recent years. Bioactive molecules are practical tools for regulating cellular processes and have been applied to control cellular differentiation, dedifferentiation, and reprogramming. In this review, we focus on recent progress in the use of bioactive molecules in skin regenerative medicine, by which desired cell types can be generated in vitro for cell therapy and conventional therapeutics can be developed to repair and regenerate skin in vivo through activation of the endogenous repairing potential. We further prospect that the bioactive molecule-base method might be one of the promising strategies to achieve in situ skin regeneration in the future.

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