Temporary storage solution for adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells.
Nofianti CE., Sari IN., Marlina, Novialdi, Pawitan JA.
Clinical Trial, published in Stem Cell Investig (2018) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
- 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
- Clinical Trial
- Journal
- Stem Cell Investig (2018)
- Country
- China
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 30050919
- PMCID
- PMC6044052
- DOI
- 10.21037/sci.2018.05.04
- Citations
- 7
Abstract (original English)
Background We have developed a simple lipoaspirate washing method using a coffee filter to eliminate liposuction noxious material before isolating adipose tissue derived mesenchymal stem cells (AT-MSCs), and used them in clinical trials. Before administration to patients, MSCs are usually suspended in physiologic saline. However, MSCs only survive for a limited time in physiologic saline. Therefore, alternative solution that can preserve MSC survival will be beneficial. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the use of physiologic saline and Dulbecco's modified Eagle's Medium (DMEM) as temporary storage solution for our AT-MSCs. Methods We did viability assessments of AT MSCs after 0, 3, 6, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours suspended in physiologic saline compared to DMEM, and stored at 4 ℃. Further proliferation capacities of the cells after various suspension times were assessed. All viability and proliferation capacity assessments were done in four replications. Differences between the various suspension time in terms of viability and proliferation capacity were compared and tested by ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis test. Results Viability was >70% after 48 hours in physiologic saline and 24 hours in DMEM, which showed that physiologic saline was superior compared to DMEM. Increase in PDT began to be significant compared to initial PDT after 24 hours in both physiologic saline,
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.