Novel therapeutic strategies for Asherman's syndrome: Endometrial regeneration using menstrual blood-derived stem cells
Awano-Kim S., Hosoya S., Yokomizo R., Kishi H., Okamoto A.
Narrative Review, published in Regen Ther (2025) — 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
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Regen Ther (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40242087
- PMCID
- PMC12002619
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.reth.2025.03.019
- Citations
- 2
Abstract (original English)
Endometrium is vital to the establishment of pregnancy through its cyclical regeneration, which, when disrupted, can lead to endometrial thinning and Asherman's syndrome (AS). AS is characterized by infertility, pelvic pain, menstrual irregularities, and placental complications. Currently, treatments such as hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and hormone replacement therapy have demonstrated variable efficacy with limited clinical evidence. Recent developments in cell therapy have introduced menstrual blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MenSCs) as a promising alternative therapeutic strategy. Menstrual blood offers a noninvasive, periodically available source of mesenchymal stem cells, MenSCs for endometrial regeneration. This review comprehensively examines the endometrial regenerative process, pathophysiology of AS, and therapeutic prospects of MenSCs, underscoring the need for continued research to optimize treatment strategies.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.