Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Effect of enzymatic and non-enzymatic isolation methods on the differentiation potential of endometrial mesenchymal stem cells.

Siginc HI., Batukan M., Sener S., Sahin F., Telci D.

Laboratory Study on Systemic / IV, published in Gene (2025) — 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
Gene (2025)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40389066
DOI
10.1016/j.gene.2025.149569

Abstract (original English)

Adult stem cells reside in various organs and tissues, including the bone marrow, heart, skin, adipose tissue, and endometrium, contributing to tissue maintenance and repair. The human endometrium undergoes cyclic proliferation, differentiation, breakdown, and shedding during a woman's reproductive life, where endometrial stem cells, such as endometrial mesenchymal stem cells (eMSCs), may be pivotal in treating gynecological disorders. This study aims to compare the effects of enzymatic and non-enzymatic isolation methods on eMSC differentiation into adipogenic, chondrogenic, osteogenic, and decidua cell lineages using immunocytochemistry and RT-PCR. Analysis of eMSCs isolated from the endometrial tissues of three healthy women using non-enzymatic and enzymatic (trypsin and collagenase type I) digestion methods for the presence of mesenchymal (CD29, CD44, CD73, CD90, CD105, ITGβ1, PDGFR, and W5C5) and hematopoietic (CD14, CD31, CD34, and CD45) stem cell markers showed no significant differences in the expression of stem cell markers that is attributable to the isolation technique. However, the trypsin enzymatic isolation technique was superior in promoting the differentiation of eMSC to osteoblast, whereas the non-enzymatic isolation method more efficiently facilitated adipocyte, chondrocyte, and decidua cell differentiation of eMSCs. These findings emphasize the importance of

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
HumansFemaleMesenchymal Stem CellsEndometriumCell DifferentiationAdultCell SeparationCells, CulturedOsteogenesisChondrogenesis

Browse all related research

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

Related research