SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

Clinical Safety and Efficacy of Allogeneic Adipose Stem Cells: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Trials.

Asch A., Kalbermatten DF., Madduri S.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 953 on Osteoarthritis, Chronic Kidney Disease, Scar, Autoimmune Research, published in Int J Mol Sci (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

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
Int J Mol Sci (2025)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
953
PMID
40650153
DOI
10.3390/ijms26136376

Abstract (original English)

Allogeneic adipose stem cells (AASCs) are increasingly recognized for their potential in regenerative medicine. They offer a promising alternative to autologous cells, with potential advantages such as availability and reduced morbidity in the recipient. Therefore, the aim of the present systematic review was to explore AASCs applications in various diseases and conditions, including skin lesions, Crohn's disease, glandular dysfunction, kidney disease, spinal muscular atrophy and osteoarthritis. This review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines; PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases were used to search for studies published between 2011 and 2024, without language restrictions. Our review was strictly limited to the inclusion of controlled clinical trials to ensure the relevance and quality of the data. After screening, 22 articles were retained, with a total of 953 patients that met the established inclusion criteria. The data obtained from these studies showed that AASCs have promising efficacy in improving scars and ulcers, managing Crohn's disease, and treating glandular dysfunction and kidney disease. In spinal muscular atrophy and osteoarthritis, preliminary results also suggested potential benefits. AASCs-based treatments were well tolerated with no major adverse effects, thus emphasizing their favorable safety profile. AASCs show a significant potential for

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 evidence
HumansAdipose TissueClinical Trials as TopicRegenerative MedicineStem Cell TransplantationStem CellsTransplantation, HomologousTreatment Outcome
Back & SpineSystemic / IVOsteoarthritisChronic Kidney DiseaseScarAutoimmune Research
View on PubMedDOI

Related research