4.6 Review

Regenerative medicine for male infertility: A focus on stem cell niche injury models

期刊

BIOMEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 45, 期 4, 页码 607-614

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bj.2022.01.015

关键词

Regenerative medicine; Mesenchymal stem; stromal cells; Stem cell niche; Secretome; Male infertility; Tissue homeostasis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stem and progenitor cells within stem cell niches are crucial for tissue renewal and regeneration, and dysfunction in these niches could lead to the development of diseases. Male infertility may be associated with disturbances in spermatogonial stem cell niches. Mesenchymal stromal cells and their secretome show potential in recovering injured stem cell niches, but their mechanisms of action remain unclear.
Stem and progenitor cells located within stem cell niches maintain the renewal and regeneration of tissues and organs throughout the life of an adult organism. Stem cell niche component dysfunction might alter the activity of stem cells and ultimately lead to the development of difficult-to-treat chronic or acute disorders. Of note, some cases of idiopathic male infertility, a highly prevalent diagnosis with no specific treatment options, might be associated with a spermatogonial stem cell(SSC) niche disturbance. To overcome this disease entity, approaches aiming at launching the regeneration of an altered stem cell niche are worth considering. Particularly, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) or their secretome might fulfill this task due to their promising contribution in recovering injured stem cell niches. However, the successful application of MSC-based treatment is limited by the uncovered mechanisms of action of MSCs and their secretome. Specific animal models should be developed or adapted to reveal the role of MSCs and their secretome in a stem cell niche recovery. In this review, in a bid to consider MSCs and their secretome as a therapeutic regenerative approach for idiopathic male infertility we focus on the rationale of SSC niche injury modeling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据