4.5 Article

Successful Isolation of Viable Adipose-Derived Stem Cells from Human Adipose Tissue Subject to Long-Term Cryopreservation: Positive Implications for Adult Stem Cell-Based Therapeutics in Patients of Advanced Age

Journal

STEM CELLS INTERNATIONAL
Volume 2015, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2015/146421

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. University of Pennsylvania Center for Human Appearance
  2. Department of Surgery
  3. Plastic Surgery Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined cell isolation, viability, and growth in adipose-derived stem cells harvested from whole adipose tissue subject to different cryopreservation lengths (2-1159 days) from patients of varying ages (26-62 years). Subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue was excised during abdominoplasties and was cryopreserved. The viability and number of adipose-derived stem cells isolated were measured after initial isolation and after 9, 18, and 28 days of growth. Data were analyzed with respect to cryopreservation duration and patient age. Significantly more viable cells were initially isolated from tissue cryopreserved <1 year than from tissue cryopreserved >2 years, irrespective of patient age. However, this difference did not persist with continued growth and there were no significant differences in cell viability or growth at subsequent time points with respect to cryopreservation duration or patient age. Mesenchymal stem cell markers were maintained in all cohorts tested throughout the duration of the study. Consequently, longer cryopreservation negatively impacts initial live adipose-derived stem cell isolation; however, this effect is neutralized with continued cell growth. Patient age does not significantly impact stem cell isolation, viability, or growth. Cryopreservation of adipose tissue is an effective long-term banking method for isolation of adipose-derived stem cells in patients of varying ages.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available