Bone Regeneration Improves with Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Extracellular Vesicles (EVs) Combined with Scaffolds: A Systematic Review
Re F., Gabusi E., Manferdini C., Russo D., Lisignoli G.
Systematic Review, published in Biology (Basel) (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- 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
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
- Systematic Review
- Journal
- Biology (Basel) (2021)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 34202598
- PMCID
- PMC8301056
- DOI
- 10.3390/biology10070579
- Citations
- 25
Abstract (original English)
Scaffolds associated with mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) derivatives, such as extracellular vesicles (EVs), represent interesting carriers for bone regeneration. This systematic review aims to analyze in vitro and in vivo studies that report the effects of EVs combined with scaffolds in bone regeneration. A methodical review of the literature was performed from PubMed and Embase from 2012 to 2020. Sixteen papers were analyzed; of these, one study was in vitro, eleven were in vivo, and four were both in vitro and in vivo studies. This analysis shows a growing interest in this upcoming field, with overall positive results. In vitro results were demonstrated as both an effect on bone mineralization and proangiogenic ability. The interesting in vitro outcomes were confirmed in vivo. Particularly, these studies showed positive effects on bone regeneration and mineralization, activation of the pathway for bone regeneration, induction of vascularization, and modulation of inflammation. However, several aspects remain to be elucidated, such as the concentration of EVs to use in clinic for bone-related applications and the definition of the real advantages.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.