Labeling Adipose-Derived Stem Cells with Hoechst 33342: Usability and Effects on Differentiation Potential and DNA Damage.
Schendzielorz P., Froelich K., Rak K., Gehrke T., Scherzad A., Hagen R.
Laboratory Study, published in Stem Cells Int (2016) — 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
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- Stem Cells Int (2016)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 27375746
- PMCID
- PMC4916289
- DOI
- 10.1155/2016/6549347
- Citations
- 3
Abstract (original English)
Adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) have been extensively studied in the field of stem cell research and possess numerous clinical applications. Cell labeling is an essential component of various experimental protocols and Hoechst 33342 (H33342) represents a cost-effective and easy methodology for live staining. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the labeling of rat ASCs with two different concentrations of H33342 (0.5 μg/mL and 5 μg/mL), with particular regard to usability, interference with cell properties, and potential DNA damage. Hoechst 33342 used at a low concentration of 0.5 μg/mL did not significantly affect cell proliferation, viability, or differentiation potential of the ASCs, nor did it cause any significant DNA damage as measured by the olive tail moment. High concentrations of 5 μg/mL H33342, however, impaired the proliferation and viability of the ASCs, and considerable DNA damage was observed. Undesirable colabeling of unlabeled cocultivated cells was seen in particular with higher concentrations of H33342, independent of varying washing procedures. Hence, H33342 labeling with lower concentrations represents a usable method, which does not affect the tested cell properties. However, the colabeling of adjacent cells is a drawback of the technique.
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.