Comparing mesenchymal stromal cells from different human tissues: bone marrow, adipose tissue and umbilical cord blood.
Bieback K., Kern S., Kocaömer A., Ferlik K., Bugert P.
Laboratory Study, published in Biomed Mater Eng (2008) — 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
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- Biomed Mater Eng (2008)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 18334717
- Citations
- 105
Abstract (original English)
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) are currently in focus because of their clinical potential in cell therapy and tissue engineering. As yet bone marrow represents the main source of MSC for both experimental and clinical studies. However, it is speculated that the clinical value might be diminished as both the number of MSC and their differentiation capacity decline with age. Alternatively, MSC have been successfully isolated from nearly every tissue attempted so far. Our work is focused on comparing MSC derived from human adult bone marrow, lipoaspirate as well as cord blood in terms of being alternatives containing high precursor frequencies and youngest adult cells. Applying identical culture conditions, major differences were observable in the frequencies and expansion potential, whereas basic biological features were comparable. Since all three tissues have been shown to contain multipotential cells we consider aspects such as isolation efficacy, frequency and expansion potential may more likely affect MSC clinical exploitation.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.