Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

A Comparative Study of the Therapeutic Potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Limbal Epithelial Stem Cells for Ocular Surface Reconstruction.

Holan V., Trosan P., Cejka C., Javorkova E., Zajicova A., Hermankova B.

Animal Study on Burns, published in Stem Cells Transl Med (2015) — 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
Stem Cells Transl Med (2015)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
26185258
DOI
10.5966/sctm.2015-0039

Abstract (original English)

Stem cell-based therapy has become an attractive and promising approach for the treatment of severe injuries or thus-far incurable diseases. However, the use of stem cells is often limited by a shortage of available tissue-specific stem cells; therefore, other sources of stem cells are being investigated and tested. In this respect, mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) have proven to be a promising stem cell type. In the present study, we prepared MSCs from bone marrow (BM-MSCs) or adipose tissue (Ad-MSCs) as well as limbal epithelial stem cells (LSCs), and their growth, differentiation, and secretory properties were compared. The cells were grown on nanofiber scaffolds and transferred onto the alkali-injured eye in a rabbit model, and their therapeutic potential was characterized. We found that BM-MSCs and tissue-specific LSCs had similar therapeutic effects. Clinical characterization of the healing process, as well as the evaluation of corneal thickness, re-epithelialization, neovascularization, and the suppression of a local inflammatory reaction, were comparable in the BM-MSC- and LSC-treated eyes, but results were significantly better than in injured, untreated eyes or in eyes treated with a nanofiber scaffold alone or with a nanofiber scaffold seeded with Ad-MSCs. Taken together, the results show that BM-MSCs' therapeutic effect on healing of injured corneal surface is c

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
AdipocytesAdipose TissueAnimalsBiomarkersBone Marrow CellsBurns, ChemicalCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyEpithelial Cells

Browse all related research

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

Related research