Comparison of the osteogenic potential of mesenchymal stem cells from the bone marrow and adipose tissue of young dogs.
Alves EG., Serakides R., Boeloni JN., Rosado IR., Ocarino NM., Oliveira HP.
Animal Study, published in BMC Vet Res (2014) — 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
- Animal Study
- Journal
- BMC Vet Res (2014)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 25178540
- DOI
- 10.1186/s12917-014-0190-y
Abstract (original English)
The aim of the present study was to compare the osteogenic potential of mesenchymal stem cells extracted from the bone marrow (BM-MSCs) and adipose tissue (AD-MSCs) of young dogs. The following parameters were assessed: dimethyl thiazolyl diphenyl tetrazolium (MTT) conversion, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, collagen and mineralised matrix synthesis, and the expressions of osterix, bone sialoprotein (BSP), and osteocalcin (OC). MTT conversion was greater in BM-MSCs compared to AD-MSCs after 14 and 21 days of differentiation; ALP activity was greater in differentiated AD-MSCs on day 7; collagen synthesis was greater in BM-MSCs on days 14 and 21; the percentage of mineralized area per field was greater in BM-MSCs compared to AD-MSCs; osterix expression was greater in BM-MSCs in days 14 and 21, and BSP and OC expression levels were greater in BM-MSCs at all the investigation time-points. It was concluded that the osteogenic potential was greater in BM-MSCs than AD-MSCs when extracted from young dogs.
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.