Inferior In Vivo Osteogenesis and Superior Angiogenesis of Human Adipose‐Derived Stem Cells Compared with Bone Marrow‐Derived Stem Cells Cultured in Xeno‐Free Conditions.
Brennan MA., Renaud A., Guilloton F., Mebarki M., Trichet V., Sensebé L.
Animal Study, published in Stem Cells Transl Med (2017) — 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
- Animal Study
- Journal
- Stem Cells Transl Med (2017)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 29052365
- PMCID
- PMC5702520
- DOI
- 10.1002/sctm.17-0133
- Citations
- 59
Abstract (original English)
The possibility of using adipose tissue-derived stromal cells (ATSC) as alternatives to bone marrow-derived stromal cells (BMSC) for bone repair has garnered interest due to the accessibility, high cell yield, and rapid in vitro expansion of ATSC. For clinical relevance, their bone forming potential in comparison to BMSC must be proven. Distinct differences between ATSC and BMSC have been observed in vitro and comparison of osteogenic potential in vivo is not clear to date. The aim of the current study was to compare the osteogenesis of human xenofree-expanded ATSC and BMSC in vitro and in an ectopic nude mouse model of bone formation. Human MSC were implanted with biphasic calcium phosphate biomaterials in subcutis pockets for 8 weeks. Implant groups were: BMSC, ATSC, BMSC and ATSC mixed together in different ratios, as well as MSC primed with either osteogenic supplements (250 μM ascorbic acid, 10 mM β-glycerolphosphate, and 10 nM dexamethasone) or 50 ng/ml recombinant bone morphogenetic protein 4 prior to implantation. In vitro results show osteogenic gene expression and differentiation potentials of ATSC. Despite this, ATSC failed to form ectopic bone in vivo, in stark contrast to BMSC, although osteogenic priming did impart minor osteogenesis to ATSC. Neovascularization was enhanced by ATSC compared with BMSC; however, less ATSC engrafted into the implant compared with BMS
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.