Sub-Regional Differences of the Human Amniotic Membrane and Their Potential Impact on Tissue Regeneration Application
Weidinger A., Poženel L., Wolbank S., Banerjee A.
Narrative Review, published in Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2020) — 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
- Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33520964
- PMCID
- PMC7839410
- DOI
- 10.3389/fbioe.2020.613804
- Citations
- 32
Abstract (original English)
For more than 100 years, the human amniotic membrane (hAM) has been used in multiple tissue regeneration applications. The hAM consists of cells with stem cell characteristics and a rich layer of extracellular matrix. Undoubtedly, the hAM with viable cells has remarkable properties such as the differentiation potential into all three germ layers, immuno-modulatory, and anti-fibrotic properties. At first sight, the hAM seems to be one structural entity. However, by integrating its anatomical location, the hAM can be divided into placental, reflected, and umbilical amniotic membrane. Recent studies show that cells of these amniotic sub-regions differ considerably in their properties such as morphology, structure, and content/release of certain bioactive factors. The aim of this review is to summarize these findings and discuss the relevance of these different properties for tissue regeneration. In summary, reflected amnion seems to be more immuno-modulatory and could have a higher reprogramming efficiency, whereas placental amnion seems to be pro-inflammatory, pro-angiogenic, with higher proliferation and differentiation capacity (e.g., chondrogenic and osteogenic), and could be more suitable for certain graft constructions. Therefore, we suggest that the respective hAM sub-region should be selected in consideration of its desired outcome. This will help to optimize and fine-tune
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.