Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Stem Cell and Exosome Therapy in Wound Healing: Traps, Paradoxes, and Tricks Transforming Paradigms

Velikic G., Supic G., Maric DL., Puletic M., Maric MD., Barac B.

Laboratory Study on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in Biomedicines (2025) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
Biomedicines (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
41463040
PMCID
PMC12730715
DOI
10.3390/biomedicines13123030

Abstract (original English)

Cell therapies hold great promise for advancing wound healing; however, translating this promise into consistent clinical benefit has proven elusive. Numerous trials have failed to reproduce the robust outcomes suggested by preclinical studies, reflecting a landscape marked by hidden traps. These include the hostile wound microenvironment, the cytotoxicity of antimicrobial dressings, poor retention and engraftment, immune clearance, and the paradoxical risk of fibrosis and scarring. Across these challenges emerge paradoxes that redefine how traps are understood. The Scarring Paradox reveals that MSCs and EVs may either suppress or reinforce fibrosis, depending on the niche context. The Immune Double-Edged Sword captures the duality of clearance and regenerative modulation. These paradoxes illustrate that traps are not static obstacles but dynamic inflection points. Recognition of these paradoxes has inspired tricks: protective biomaterial carriers, preconditioning strategies, engineered exosomes, and combinatorial therapies with anti-fibrotic, neuromodulatory, or microbiome-targeted adjuncts. Case studies illustrate how classical traps manifest in clinical practice and how paradoxes guide innovation. Emerging adjuncts, ranging from herbal bioactives and bioelectric modulation to circadian synchronization and digital twins, point toward more unconventional but increasingly plaus

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 evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research