Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Defined serum- and xeno-free cryopreservation of mesenchymal stem cells.

Al-Saqi SH., Saliem M., Quezada HC., Ekblad Å., Jonasson AF., Hovatta O.

Laboratory Study on Face & Skin, published in Cell Tissue Bank (2014) — 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
Cell Tissue Bank (2014)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
25117730
DOI
10.1007/s10561-014-9463-8

Abstract (original English)

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have vast potential in cell therapy, and are experimentally used in the clinic. Therefore, it is critical to find a serum- and xeno-free cryopreservation method. The aim of this study was to compare two serum- and xeno-free cryoprotectants for MSCs. Adipose tissue MSCs (Ad-MSCs) and bone marrow MSCs (BM-MSCs) were cryopreserved in two cryoprotectants: the defined serum- and xeno-free STEM-CELLBANKER™ (CB) and 10 % dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) in a xeno-free serum replacement cell culture medium and compared to non-cryopreserved MSCs. MSCs cryopreserved in CB or DMSO had similar morphology and surface marker expression compared to their respective non-cryopreserved MSC. Ad-MSCs and BM-MSC in both cryoprotectant media exhibited reduced mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) for CD105, BM-MSCs for CD73 and Ad-MSC increased MFI for HLA class I compared to non-cryopreserved MSCs. Population doubling time of CB cryopreserved and non-cryopreserved Ad-MSCs was similar (38.1 ± 13.6 and 36.8 ± 12.1 h), but somewhat higher when cryopreserved in DMSO (42.2 ± 10.8 h). BM-MSCs had higher population doubling time (CB 47.7 ± 11.4 and DMSO 62.3 ± 32.9 h respectively, p < 0.05) compared to Ad-MSCs. The viability of Ad-MSCs was significantly higher after cryopreservation in CB compared to DMSO (90.4 ± 4.5 % vs. 79.9 ± 3.8 % respectively). Ad-MSCs and BM-MSCs retained their m

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 TissueAdolescentAdultBone Marrow CellsCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCells, CulturedChildChild, PreschoolCryopreservation

Browse all related research

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

Related research