Regenerative effects of adipose-tissue-derived stem cells for treatment of peripheral nerve injuries.
Kolar MK., Kingham PJ.
Narrative Review, published in Biochem Soc Trans (2014) — 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
- Biochem Soc Trans (2014)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 24849239
- DOI
- 10.1042/BST20140004
- Citations
- 26
Abstract (original English)
Peripheral nerve injuries are a common occurrence affecting the nerves found outside the central nervous system. Complete nerve transections necessitate surgical re-anastomosis, and, in cases where there is a significant gap between the two ends of the injured nerve, bridging strategies are required to repair the defect. The current clinical gold standard is the nerve graft, but this has a number of limitations, including donor site morbidity. An active area of research is focused on developing other techniques to replace these grafts, by creating tubular nerve-guidance conduits from natural and synthetic materials, which are often supplemented with biological cues such as growth factors and regenerative cells. In the present short review, we focus on the use of adipose-tissue-derived stem cells and the possible mechanisms through which they may exert a positive influence on peripheral nerve regeneration, thereby enabling more effective nerve repair.
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.