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

Body Fluid-Derived Stem Cells: Powering Innovative, Less-Invasive Cell Therapies.

Goff AD., Zhang X., Thomas B., Ong SSY., Atala A., Zhang Y.

Narrative Review on Back & Spine, published in Int J Mol Sci (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
Int J Mol Sci (2025)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40362618
PMCID
PMC12072510
DOI
10.3390/ijms26094382
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

Stem cell therapy offers significant promise for tissue regeneration and repair. Traditionally, bone marrow- and adipose-derived stem cells have served as primary sources, but their clinical use is limited by invasiveness and low cell yield. This review focuses on body fluid-derived stem cells as an emerging, non-invasive, and readily accessible alternative. We examine stem cells isolated from amniotic fluid, peripheral blood, cord blood, menstrual fluid, urine, synovial fluid, breast milk, and cerebrospinal fluid, highlighting their unique biological properties and therapeutic potential. By comparing their characteristics and barriers to clinical translation, we propose body fluid-derived stem cells as a promising source for regenerative applications, with continued research needed to fully achieve their clinical utility.

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
HumansStem CellsCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyBody FluidsStem Cell TransplantationAnimals

Browse all related research

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

Related research