Meta-analysis of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for intrauterine adhesions: a comprehensive consideration of efficacy and safety.
Gao J., Zhou X., Jiang N., Zhang Y., Han J., Jia T.
Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 233, published in Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
- 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
- Meta-analysis
- Journal
- Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2025)
- Country
- Switzerland
- Reported sample size
- 233
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 40881657
- PMCID
- PMC12381504
- DOI
- 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1619778
- Citations
- 1
Abstract (original English)
Background Intrauterine adhesions (IUA), a common gynecological condition, often result from endometrial injury and fibrosis. Traditional therapies like hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and hormone therapy show limited efficacy in endometrial repair and high recurrence rates. Stem cell therapy, particularly using mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), has emerged as a promising alternative. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of MSCs therapy for IUA. Methods We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2025. Using random or fixed-effects models, we analyzed outcomes including pregnancy rates, endometrial thickness, menstrual improvement, and safety indicators. Subgroup analyses were performed based on stem cell sources and transplantation methods. Results Twelve studies with 233 patients were included. Stem cell therapy significantly improved menstrual outcomes (RR = 34.54, 95%CI: [15.07-79.18]), pregnancy rates (RR = 21.86, 95%CI: [8.60-55.56]), live birth rates (RR = 18.00, 95%CI: [6.67-48.55]), and endometrial thickness (MD = 2.28mm, 95%CI: [1.60-2.96]). Subgroup analyses indicated that adipose-derived (MD = 3.34 mm) and menstrual blood-derived (MD = 3.62 mm) stem cells exhibited the highest efficacy. Safety data indicated mild abdominal pain in 5.15% and abnormal blood indices in 4.29% of patients, with no severe complications. Concl
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.