4.5 Review

Stem Cells and Their Role in Renal Ischaemia Reperfusion Injury

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY
Volume 37, Issue 1, Pages 16-29

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000345731

Keywords

Stem cells; Ischaemia reperfusion injury; Acute renal injury; Transplantation

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MR/J006742/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. Medical Research Council [MR/J006742/1] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Ischaemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) remains one of the leading causes of acute kidney injury (AKI). IRI is an underlying multifactorial pathophysiological process which affects the outcome in both native and transplanted patients. The high morbidity and mortality associated with IRI/ AKI and disappointing results from current available clinical therapeutic approaches prompt further research. Stem cells (SC) are undifferentiated cells that can undergo both renewal and differentiation into one or more cell types which can possibly ameliorate IRI. Aim: To carry out a detailed literature analysis and construct a comprehensive literature review addressing the role of SC in AKI secondary to IRI. Methods: Evidence favouring the role of SC in renal IRI and evidence showing no benefits of SC in renal IRI are the two main aspects to be studied. The search strategy was based on an extensive search addressing MESH terms and free text terms. Results: The majority of studies in the field of renal IRI and stem cell therapy show substantial benefits. Conclusions: Studies were mostly conducted in small animal models, thus underscoring the need for further pre-clinical studies in larger animal models, and results should be taken with caution. SC therapy may be promising though controversy exists in the exact mechanism. Thorough scientific exploration is required to assess mechanism, safety profile, reproducibility and methods to monitor administered SC. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

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