Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMedOpen access

Comparative Analysis of Stromal Vascular Fraction and Alternative Mechanisms in Bone Fracture Stimulation to Bridge the Gap between Nature and Technological Advancement: A Systematic Review.

Goncharov EN., Koval OA., Nikolaevich Bezuglov E., Engelgard M., Igorevich EI., Velentinovich Kotenko K.

Systematic Review on Chronic Inflammation, published in Biomedicines (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

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
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
Systematic Review
Journal
Biomedicines (2024)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
38397944
PMCID
PMC10887176
DOI
10.3390/biomedicines12020342
Citations
9

Abstract (original English)

Background Various stimulation methods, including electrical, ultrasound, mechanical, and biological interventions, are explored, each leveraging intricate cellular and molecular dynamics to expedite healing. The advent of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) marks a significant stride, offering multifarious benefits in bone healing, from enhanced bone formation to optimal vascular integration, drawing a harmonious balance between innate mechanisms and scientific advancements. Methods This systematic review was conducted focusing on literature from 2016 to 2023 and encompassing various bone healing stimulation mechanisms like SVF, electrical, ultrasound, and mechanical stimulation. The extracted data underwent meticulous synthesis and analysis, emphasizing comparative evaluations of mechanisms, applications, and outcomes of each intervention. Results The reviewed studies reveal the potential of SVF in bone fracture healing, with its regenerative and anti-inflammatory effects. The purification of SVF is crucial for safe therapeutic use. Characterization involves flow cytometry and microscopy. Studies show SVF's efficacy in bone regeneration, versatility in various contexts, and potential for clinical use. SVF appears superior to electrical, ultrasound, and mechanical stimulation, with low complications. Conclusions This review compares bone healing methods, including SVF. It provides

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research