Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMedOpen access

Why Use Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Tendinopathic Patients: A Systematic Review.

Itro A., Trotta MC., Miranda R., Paoletta M., De Cicco A., Lepre CC.

Systematic Review on Tendon Injury, published in Pharmaceutics (2022) — 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
Pharmaceutics (2022)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
35745724
PMCID
PMC9230128
DOI
10.3390/pharmaceutics14061151
Citations
7

Abstract (original English)

The aim of the present systematic review was to provide a clear overview of the clinical current research progress in the use of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ASCs) as an effective therapeutic option for the management of tendinopathies, pathologies clinically characterized by persistent mechanical pain and structural alteration of the tendons. The review was carried out using three databases (Scopus, ISI Web of Science and PubMed) and analyzed records from 2013 to 2021. Only English-language papers describing the isolation and manipulation of adipose tissue as source of ASCs and presenting ASCs as treatment for clinical tendinopathies were included. Overall, seven clinical studies met the inclusion criteria and met the minimum quality inclusion threshold. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by groups of three reviewers. The available evidence showed the efficacy and safety of ASCs treatment for tendinopathies, although it lacked a clear description of the biomolecular mechanisms underlying the beneficial properties of ASCs.

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