Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialPubMedOpen access

Bridging the gap: clinical translation of adipose-derived stem cells - a scoping review of clinical trials.

Su H., Chau H., Li Q., Xiao F., Sun Y., Chen J.

Randomized Controlled Trial on Immune Modulation, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • 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
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
Stem Cell Res Ther (2025)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40483503
PMCID
PMC12145640
DOI
10.1186/s13287-025-04405-3
Citations
5

Abstract (original English)

Background Adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) have emerged as a promising therapeutic tool in regenerative medicine due to their multipotency, immunomodulatory properties, and ease of procurement. Despite extensive preclinical research, the clinical translation of ADSCs remains fragmented, with challenges in standardization, reproducibility, and evidence synthesis. Objective This scoping review, complemented by bibliometric analysis, aims to map the landscape of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating ADSC therapies, identify gaps between basic research and clinical translation, and highlight emerging trends in the field. Methods A systematic search of Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, EudraCT, and ChiCTR database (2009-2025) identified 82 RCTs. Bibliometric analysis of preclinical studies was conducted using VoSviewer to visualize keyword clusters and temporal trends. Data on trial characteristics, endpoints, and translational challenges were extracted and synthesized. Results The 82 included RCTs spanned 17 medical specialties, with orthopedics (26.8%), dermatology (14.6%), and neurology (9.7%) being the most studied. Spain (21.95%) and China (18.29%) and the USA (15.85%) led trial numbers, but 97% were single-country studies with a median sample size of 40. Primary endpoints trends from safety to efficacy. Bibliometric analysis revealed three cluster

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
HumansAdipose TissueTranslational Research, BiomedicalStem CellsRegenerative MedicineStem Cell TransplantationRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Browse all related research

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

Related research