Osteocalcin biomarker level evaluation on fracture healing with bone defect after stromal vascular fraction application in murine model.
Dradjat RS., Sananta P., Rosandi RD., Siahaan LD.
Animal Study, published in Ann Med Surg (Lond) (2021) — 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
- Animal Study
- Journal
- Ann Med Surg (Lond) (2021)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 34840768
- PMCID
- PMC8606847
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.103020
- Citations
- 11
Abstract (original English)
Introduction Bone defect (3 mm in murine model) is a condition when the bone tissue cannot undergo a natural healing process caused by severe trauma, tumor, or irradiation. A bone defect is a challenge even for experienced Orthopaedic surgeons. Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) is a heterogeneous cell population derived from adipose tissue that results from minimal manipulation of the adipose tissue itself. Several studies have elucidated the effect of either SVF on bone defect healing. However, to the author's knowledge, there is no study evaluating the effect of SVF application on fracture healing, which was measured with osteocalcin biomarker. This study aims to evaluate the effect of SVF application on bone defect healing measured with osteocalcin as a biomarker of bone healing. Materials and methods This was an animal study involving twelve Wistar strain Rattus norvegivus . They were divided into three groups: negative group (normal rats), positive group (rats with bone defect and treated without SVF application), and SVF group (rats with bone defect and treated with SVF application). After 30 days, the rats were sacrificed, the osteocalcin biomarkers were evaluated. This biomarker was quantified using ELISA. Results Osteocalcin biomarker expressions were higher in the group treated with SVF application than those without using SVF. All comparisons of the SVF group and posit
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.