The comparison of multilineage differentiation of bone marrow and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells.
Zhu X., Du J., Liu G.
Laboratory Study, published in Clin Lab (2012) — 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
- Clin Lab (2012)
- Country
- Germany
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 23163104
- DOI
- 10.7754/clin.lab.2012.120312
- Citations
- 24
Abstract (original English)
Background To compare the roles of adipose and bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs and BMSCs) in multiple differentiation capacity to provide a theoretical basis for stem cell transplantation. Methods We isolated bone marrow and adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells and compared their phenotype, cell doubling time, the secretion of factors, and the ability of multi-differentiation. Results BMSCs and AMSCs were similar in cell phenotype and the differences existed only between the expression of CD106. The proliferation rate of AMSCs was faster than of BMSCs (doubling time 28h vs. 39h) and the capacity to suppress T cell proliferation and activation was weakened in AMSCs. In addition, both sources of cells were able to differentiate into bone, fat, and cartilage which proved their stem cell properties. Conclusions Cell origin and abundance were decisive factors in stem cell applications and with the same premise as for AMSCs and BMSCs, adipose tissue is a more promising source of stem cells.
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.