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

Myogenic Cell Transplantation in Genetic and Acquired Diseases of Skeletal Muscle

Boyer O., Butler-Browne G., Chinoy H., Cossu G., Galli F., Lilleker JB.

Narrative Review, published in Front Genet (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
Narrative Review
Journal
Front Genet (2021)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
34408774
PMCID
PMC8365145
DOI
10.3389/fgene.2021.702547
Citations
22

Abstract (original English)

This article will review myogenic cell transplantation for congenital and acquired diseases of skeletal muscle. There are already a number of excellent reviews on this topic, but they are mostly focused on a specific disease, muscular dystrophies and in particular Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. There are also recent reviews on cell transplantation for inflammatory myopathies, volumetric muscle loss (VML) (this usually with biomaterials), sarcopenia and sphincter incontinence, mainly urinary but also fecal. We believe it would be useful at this stage, to compare the same strategy as adopted in all these different diseases, in order to outline similarities and differences in cell source, pre-clinical models, administration route, and outcome measures. This in turn may help to understand which common or disease-specific problems have so far limited clinical success of cell transplantation in this area, especially when compared to other fields, such as epithelial cell transplantation. We also hope that this may be useful to people outside the field to get a comprehensive view in a single review. As for any cell transplantation procedure, the choice between autologous and heterologous cells is dictated by a number of criteria, such as cell availability, possibility of in vitro expansion to reach the number required, need for genetic correction for many but not necessarily all muscular

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.