Ethical, legal and practical issues of establishing an adipose stem cell bank for research.
West CC., Murray IR., González ZN., Hindle P., Hay DC., Stewart KJ.
Narrative Review, published in J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (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
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2014)
- Country
- Netherlands
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 24529696
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.01.030
- Citations
- 9
Abstract (original English)
Access to human tissue is critical to medical research, however the laws and regulations surrounding gaining ethical and legal access to tissue are often poorly understood. Recently, there has been a huge increase in the interest surrounding the therapeutic application of adipose tissue, and adipose-derived stem cells. To facilitate our own research interests and possibly assist our local colleagues and collaborators, we established a Research Tissue Bank (RTB) to collect, store and distribute human adipose tissue derived cells with all the appropriate ethical approval for subsequent downstream research. Here we examine the legal, ethical and practical issues relating to the banking of adipose tissue for research in the UK, and discuss relevant international guidelines and policies. We also share our experiences of establishing an RTB including the necessary infrastructure and the submission of an application to a Research Ethics Committee (REC).
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
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.