Stem-cell therapy and platelet-rich plasma in regenerative medicines: A review on pros and cons of the technologies
Ramaswamy Reddy SH., Reddy R., Babu NC., Ashok GN.
Narrative Review, published in J Oral Maxillofac Pathol (2018) — 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
- J Oral Maxillofac Pathol (2018)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 30651682
- PMCID
- PMC6306612
- DOI
- 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_93_18
- Citations
- 86
Abstract (original English)
Regenerative medicine encompasses new emerging branch of medical sciences that involves the functional restoration of tissues or organs caused by severe injuries or chronic diseases. Currently, there are two contending technologies that can repair and restore the damaged tissues, namely platelet-rich plasma (PRP)- and stem cell (SC)-based therapies. PRP is a component of blood that contains platelet concentrations above the normal level and includes platelet-related growth factors and plasma-derived fibrinogen. Platelets are the frontline healing response to injuries as they release growth factors for tissue repair. SCs, on the other hand, are the unspecialized, undifferentiated, immature cells that based on specific stimuli can divide and differentiate into specific type of cells and tissues. Differentiated SCs can divide and replace the worn out or damaged tissues to become tissue- or organ-specific cells with specialized functions. Despite these differences, both approaches rely on rejuvenating the damaged tissue. This review is focused on delineating the preparation procedures, similarities and disparities and advantages and disadvantages of PRP- and SC-based therapies.
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.