Fluorescence-Based Mono- and Multimodal Imaging for In Vivo Tracking of Mesenchymal Stem Cells
Yun WS., Cho H., Jeon SI., Lim DK., Kim K.
Narrative Review, published in Biomolecules (2023) — 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
- Biomolecules (2023)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 38136656
- PMCID
- PMC10742164
- DOI
- 10.3390/biom13121787
- Citations
- 14
Abstract (original English)
The advancement of stem cell therapy has offered transformative therapeutic outcomes for a wide array of diseases over the past decades. Consequently, stem cell tracking has become significant in revealing the mechanisms of action and ensuring safe and effective treatments. Fluorescence stands out as a promising choice for stem cell tracking due to its myriad advantages, including high resolution, real-time monitoring, and multi-fluorescence detection. Furthermore, combining fluorescence with other tracking modalities-such as bioluminescence imaging (BLI), positron emission tomography (PET), photoacoustic (PA), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance (MR)-can address the limitations of single fluorescence detection. This review initially introduces stem cell tracking using fluorescence imaging, detailing various labeling strategies such as green fluorescence protein (GFP) tagging, fluorescence dye labeling, and nanoparticle uptake. Subsequently, we present several combinations of strategies for efficient and precise detection.
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.