Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

A Molecular and Clinical Review of Stem Cell Therapy in Critical Limb Ischemia

Parikh PP., Liu ZJ., Velazquez OC.

Narrative Review on Peripheral Artery Disease, published in Stem Cells Int (2017) — 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
Narrative Review
Journal
Stem Cells Int (2017)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
29358955
PMCID
PMC5735649
DOI
10.1155/2017/3750829
Citations
27

Abstract (original English)

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is one of the major vascular complications in individuals suffering from diabetes and in the elderly that can progress to critical limb ischemia (CLI), portending significant burden in terms of patient morbidity and mortality. Over the last two decades, stem cell therapy (SCT) has risen as an attractive alternative to traditional surgical and/or endovascular revascularization to treat this disorder. The primary benefit of SCT is to induce therapeutic neovascularization and promote collateral vessel formation to increase blood flow in the ischemic limb and soft tissue. Existing evidence provides a solid rationale for ongoing in-depth studies aimed at advancing current SCT that may change the way PAD/CLI patients are treated.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research