4.6 Review

A comparison of isolation and culture protocols for human amniotic mesenchymal stem cells

Journal

CELL CYCLE
Volume 21, Issue 15, Pages 1543-1556

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15384101.2022.2060641

Keywords

Mesenchymal stem cells; amniotic membrane; culture; isolation; stem cell markers

Categories

Funding

  1. Qatar National Library

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The successful translation of MSCs from bench to bedside relies on their regenerative capabilities and immunomodulatory potential. Adult tissue-derived MSCs face challenges in sourcing and characterization, while alternative sources, such as amniotic membrane, offer advantages for clinical applications with optimized culture methods.
The successful translation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from bench to bedside is predicated upon their regenerative capabilities and immunomodulatory potential. Many challenges still exist in making MSCs a viable and cost-effective therapeutic option, due in part to the challenges of sourcing MSCs from adult tissues and inconsistencies in the characterization of MSCs. In many cases, adult MSC collection is an invasive procedure, and ethical concerns and age-related heterogeneity further complicate obtaining adult tissue derived MSCs at the scales needed for clinical applications. Alternative adult sources, such as post-partum associated tissues, offer distinct advantages to overcome these challenges. However, successful therapeutic applications rely on the efficient ex-vivo expansion of the stem cells while avoiding any culture-related phenotypic alterations, which requires optimized and standardized isolation, culture, and cell preservation methods. In this review, we have compared the isolation and culture methods for MSCs originating from the human amniotic membrane (hAMSCs) of the placenta to identify the elements that support the extended subculture potential of hAMSCs without compromising their immune-privileged, pluripotent regenerative potential.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available