Cell-based therapy in thin endometrium and Asherman syndrome
Gharibeh N., Aghebati-Maleki L., Madani J., Pourakbari R., Yousefi M., Ahmadian Heris J.
Narrative Review, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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 Cell Res Ther (2022)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 35090547
- PMCID
- PMC8796444
- DOI
- 10.1186/s13287-021-02698-8
- Citations
- 58
Abstract (original English)
Numerous treatment strategies have so far been proposed for treating refractory thin endometrium either without or with the Asherman syndrome. Inconsistency in the improvement of endometrial thickness is a common limitation of such therapies including tamoxifen citrate as an ovulation induction agent, acupuncture, long-term pentoxifylline and tocopherol or tocopherol only, low-dose human chorionic gonadotropin during endometrial preparation, aspirin, luteal gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist supplementation, and extended estrogen therapy. Recently, cell therapy has been proposed as an ideal alternative for endometrium regeneration, including the employment of stem cells, platelet-rich plasma, and growth factors as therapeutic agents. The mechanisms of action of cell therapy include the cytokine induction, growth factor production, natural killer cell activity reduction, Th17 and Th1 decrease, and Treg cell and Th2 increase. Since cell therapy is personalized, dynamic, interactive, and specific and could be an effective strategy. Despite its promising nature, further research is required for improving the procedure and the safety of this strategy. These methods and their results are discussed in this article.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.