Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

In vitro differentiation capacity of human breastmilk stem cells: A systematic review

Pacheco CMR., Ferreira PE., Saçaki CS., Tannous LA., Zotarelli-Filho IJ., Guarita-Souza LC.

Systematic Review on Neuroinflammation, Scar, published in World J Stem Cells (2019) — 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
Systematic Review
Journal
World J Stem Cells (2019)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
31768226
PMCID
PMC6851011
DOI
10.4252/wjsc.v11.i11.1005
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

Background Mesenchymal stem cells are pluripotent cells that have the ability to generate cells from a cell line or in other cell types from different tissues but from the same origin. Although those cells have more limited differentiation capacity than embryonic stem cells, they are easily obtained from somatic tissue and can be grown in large quantities. This characteristic of undifferentiated stem cells differentiating into different cell lines arouses strategies in regenerative medicine for the treatment of different diseases such as neurodegenerative diseases. Aim To evaluate the cell differentiation capacity of human breastmilk stem cells for the three germ layers by a systematic review. Methods The searched databases were PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, and COCHRANE LIBRARY, published between 2007 and 2018 in the English language. All were in vitro studies for analysis of the "cell differentiation potential" in the literature using the keywords "human breastmilk," "stem cells," and keywords combined with the Boolean operator "NOT" were used to exclude those articles that had the word "CANCER" and their respective synonyms, which were previously consulted according to medical subject heading terms. PRISMA 2009 guidelines were followed in this study. Results A total of 315 titles and abstracts of articles were examined. From these, 21 were in common with more than one database, leav

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research