Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyEurope PMCOpen access

A comparative study of mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells isolated using three easy-to-perform approaches

Lu Y., Han Y., Zhou L., Shi G., Bai L., Wang K.

Animal Study on Chronic Wound, published in FEBS Open Bio (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
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
Animal Study
Journal
FEBS Open Bio (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
36153697
PMCID
PMC9714364
DOI
10.1002/2211-5463.13493
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

Mouse bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (mBM-MSCs) are important for preclinical tissue regeneration and repair studies. In the present study, we isolated mBM-MSCs using three easy-to-perform methods (whole bone marrow-adherent culture, density-gradient centrifugation, and bone digestion), and then compared the morphology, proliferation, differentiation, and paracrine factor profiles of the isolated mBM-MSCs. Of these three isolation methods, the bone digestion method resulted in the highest quantity of mBM-MSCs with high growth potential and moderate differentiation. Conversely, the mBM-MSCs isolated through the whole bone marrow-adherent method exhibited the lowest potency for proliferation and differentiation. The differentially expressed factors between mBM-MSCs were primarily those involved in immune responses. The highly expressed secreted factors included cytokines/members of the chemokine family, growth factors, and protein binding/proteinase activity. These findings provide a fundamental reference for development of MSC isolation methods.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Bone Marrow CellsMesenchymal Stem CellsAnimalsMiceCytokinesWound HealingCell Differentiation

Browse all related research

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

Related research