Tendon healing in the era of regenerative medicine: literature review

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Background and objective Tendon injuries are common musculoskeletal conditions that affect both athletic and working populations. Although surgical intervention remains the mainstay of treatment for large tendon injuries, conventional approaches often result in suboptimal healing and functional outcomes. Recent evidence has shown that stem cell therapy may play a role in the management of these injuries. This review comprehensively examines the current literature on stem cell applications in tendon regeneration by analyzing both preclinical and clinical evidence. Specifically, we evaluated various stem cell populations, their characteristics, delivery mechanisms, and repair processes. Additionally, we addressed the limitations of stem cell-based therapies while highlighting emerging trends and future research directions in this rapidly evolving field. Methods PubMed was searched for articles published in August 2025. Boolean operators "Tendon" OR "Tendon repair" OR "Tendon regeneration" OR "Tendon injury" AND "Scaffold" AND "Secretomes" OR "Exosomes" OR "Stem Cells" were used to search for articles. Inclusion criteria included studies within the last 10 years, performed on humans or animals, written in English, as well as articles considered clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, reviews, or systematic reviews. We identified approximately 1,800 studies, w

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

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