Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Influence of Mesenchymal Stem Cell Sources on Their Regenerative Capacities on Different Surfaces.

Mucientes A., Herranz E., Moro E., González-Corchón A., Peña-Soria MJ., Abasolo L.

Laboratory Study on Face & Skin, published in Cells (2021) — 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
Cells (2021)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
33672328
DOI
10.3390/cells10020481

Abstract (original English)

Current gold-standard strategies for bone regeneration do not achieve the optimal recovery of bone biomechanical properties. To bypass these limitations, tissue engineering techniques based on hybrid materials made up of osteoprogenitor cells-such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)-and bioactive ceramic scaffolds-such as calcium phosphate-based (CaPs) bioceramics-seem promising. The biological properties of MSCs are influenced by the tissue source. This study aims to define the optimal MSC source and construct (i.e., the MSC-CaP combination) for clinical application in bone regeneration. A previous iTRAQ analysis generated the hypothesis that anatomical proximity to bone has a direct effect on MSC phenotype. MSCs were isolated from adipose tissue, bone marrow, and dental pulp, then cultured both on a plastic surface and on CaPs (hydroxyapatite and β-tricalcium phosphate), to compare their biological features. On plastic, MSCs isolated from dental pulp (DPSCs) presented the highest proliferation capacity and the greatest osteogenic potential. On both CaPs, DPSCs demonstrated the greatest capacity to colonise the bioceramics. Furthermore, the results demonstrated a trend that DPSCs had the most robust increase in ALP activity. Regarding CaPs, β-tricalcium phosphate obtained the best viability results, while hydroxyapatite had the highest ALP activity values. Therefore, we propose D

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
AdultAlkaline PhosphataseBone RegenerationCalcium PhosphatesCell SurvivalDurapatiteFemaleHumansIsotope LabelingMale

Browse all related research

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

Related research