Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Comparison of several attachment methods for human iPS, embryonic and adipose-derived stem cells for tissue engineering.

Lam MT., Longaker MT.

Laboratory Study on Face & Skin, Hip, published in J Tissue Eng Regen Med (2012) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
J Tissue Eng Regen Med (2012)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
22610948
PMCID
PMC4086291
DOI
10.1002/term.1499
Citations
63

Abstract (original English)

As actual stem cell application quickly approaches tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, aspects such as cell attachment to scaffolds and biomaterials become important and are often overlooked. Here, we compare the effects of several attachment proteins on the adhesion, proliferation and stem cell identity of three promising human stem cell types: human adipose-derived stem cells (hASCs), human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs). Traditional tissue culture polystyrene plates (TCPS), Matrigel (Mat), laminin (Lam), fibronectin (FN) and poly-L-lysine (PLL) were investigated as attachment protein surfaces. For hASCs typically cultured on TCPS, laminin resulted in the greatest cell attachment and proliferation with largest cell areas, indicating favourability by cell spreading. However, mesenchymal stem cell markers indicative of hASCs were slightly more expressed on surfaces with lowest cell attachment, corresponding to increased cell roundness, a newly observed attribute in hASCs possibly indicating a more stem cell-like character. hESCs preferred Matrigel as a feeder-free culture surface. Interestingly, hiPSCs favoured laminin over Matrigel for colony expansion, shown by larger cell colony area and perimeter lengths, although cell numbers and stem cell marker expression level remained highest on Matrigel. These data provide a pr

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
Adipose TissueCell AdhesionEmbryonic Stem CellsHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsTissue EngineeringTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

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

Related research