Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisPubMed

The Use of Adipose Derived Stem Cells in Chronic Wound Healing.

Ladley SM., Naghdi S.

Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 377 on Chronic Wound, published in Int Wound J (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

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
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
Meta-analysis
Journal
Int Wound J (2026)
Country
England
Reported sample size
377
Source database
PubMed
PMID
42438377
DOI
10.1111/iwj.70986

Abstract (original English)

Wound healing is a complex process of angiogenesis, inflammation and proliferation relying on co-ordination of multiple cell types and cytokines. Dysregulation of this process can lead to chronicity, which we are seeing more commonly due to an increasingly comorbid population. Adipose-Derived Stem Cells (ADSCs) show promise as a therapy though their ability to augment the tissue microenvironment via multiple pathways. This review aims to synthesise evidence on the effects of ADSCs on chronic wound healing to assess their efficacy. A systematic search of four databases was conducted covering a period up to June 2025. Comparative studies investigating ADSCs and wounds of any aetiology were included, and a meta-analysis was performed on pooled data. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis (N = 498). Patients treated with ADSCs were more likely to heal at short-term follow-up (odds ratio (OR) 6.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.80-11.27; n = 377 I 2 = 0.00% p = 0.00) and healed significantly faster (mean difference -1.90, CI -2.28, -1.51; n = 210, I 2 = 23.58, p = 0.00) than controls. Grades of recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment showed this evidence is of moderate certainty. This review presents clinical evidence that ADSC use is a safe therapy which expedites the healing of wounds from multiple aetiologies.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

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.

How we grade evidence
HumansWound HealingAdipose TissueFemaleChronic DiseaseStem Cell TransplantationWounds and InjuriesMaleMiddle AgedAdult

Browse all related research

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

Related research