Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMed

Isolation of adipose-derived stem cells: a comparison among different methods.

Markarian CF., Frey GZ., Silveira MD., Chem EM., Milani AR., Ely PB.

Laboratory Study, published in Biotechnol Lett (2013) — 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
Biotechnol Lett (2013)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
24322777
DOI
10.1007/s10529-013-1425-x
Citations
69

Abstract (original English)

Adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs) are usually isolated by digestion with collagenase. We have compared alternative methods to isolate ASCs in a more economically viable protocol. Nine protocols using red blood cells lysis buffer solution, trypsin, collagenase and centrifugation were compared; the isolation rate, cell viability, expansion rate, immunophenotype and differentiation in adipogenic and osteogenic lineages were analyzed. ASCs were isolated and successfully maintained by digestion with trypsin. Cells presented similar immunophenotypes, adipogenic differentiation and in vitro proliferation but an osteogenic differentiation capacity up to seven times higher than ASCs isolated by collagenase. This alternative protocol is thus efficient and more cost-effective than the commonly-used methods and may represent a promising protocol for obtaining ASCs for bone tissue engineering.

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
Adipose TissueCell ProliferationCell SeparationCell SurvivalImmunophenotypingSpecimen HandlingStem Cells

Browse all related research

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