Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32430063›Full record

ArticleStem cell research & therapy2020

Comparative separation methods and biological characteristics of human placental and umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells in serum-free culture conditions.

Xiao Yi, Feng Chen, Fenghua Liu, Qing Peng, Yang Li, Shao Li, Jiang Du, Yi Gao, Yifeng Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cell research & therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Exosomes from Different Sources in Promoting Wound Healing.Recent advances in drug delivery and formulation · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Placental stem cells-derived exosomes stimulate cutaneous wound regenerationFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiao YiDepartment of Gynecology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, Guangdong Province, China.
Feng ChenDepartment of Gynecology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, Guangdong Province, China.
Fenghua LiuDepartment of Reproductive Medicine Center, Provincial Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Qing PengDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery II, Guangdong Provincial Research Center for Artificial Organ and Tissue Engineering, Guangzhou Clinical Research and Transformation Center for Artificial Liver, Institute of Regenerative Medicine, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Yang LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery II, Guangdong Provincial Research Center for Artificial Organ and Tissue Engineering, Guangzhou Clinical Research and Transformation Center for Artificial Liver, Institute of Regenerative Medicine, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Shao LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery II, Guangdong Provincial Research Center for Artificial Organ and Tissue Engineering, Guangzhou Clinical Research and Transformation Center for Artificial Liver, Institute of Regenerative Medicine, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Jiang DuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery II, Guangdong Provincial Research Center for Artificial Organ and Tissue Engineering, Guangzhou Clinical Research and Transformation Center for Artificial Liver, Institute of Regenerative Medicine, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Yi GaoDepartment of Gynecology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, Guangdong Province, China. Gaoyi6146@163.com.
Yifeng WangDepartment of Gynecology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, Guangdong Province, China. wyf2015@163.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9559-7211
Zhujiang Hospital · CNGuangdong Province Women and Children Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are considered to be an effective tool for regenerative medicine with promising applications for clinical therapy. However, incongruent data has been reported partially owing to their functional heterogeneity. To provide sufficient and suitable clinical seed cells derived from the placenta for MSC therapy, we compared the various current isolation methods, as well as the biological characteristics, of different human placenta mesenchymal stem cells (hPMSCs).

methodsWe selected placentas from 35 informed donors and exploited three commonly used methods. MSCs were isolated from different parts of placental tissue including umbilical cord (UC), amniotic membrane (AM), chorionic membrane (CM), chorionic villi (CV), and deciduae (DC). The appropriate isolation methods for each type of hPMSCs were first assessed. The resulting five MSC types from the same individuals were identified based on their surface marker expression, proliferation capacity, transcriptome, differentiation, multipotency and karyotype.

resultsAll three methods successfully isolated the five hPMSC types from placental tissues. However, the UC-MSCs were most effectively separated via the tissue explant method, while the enzymatic digestion method was found to be more suitable for separating CV-MSCs, owing to its higher output efficiency compared to the other methods. Alternatively, the perfusion method was complicated and exhibited the lowest efficiency for cell isolation and uniformity. Furthermore, we determined that UC-MSCs and CV-MSCs express a higher level of paracrine cytokines and display much stronger proliferative capacity as well as superior extraction efficiency. Finally, karyotype analysis revealed that DC-MSCs are derived from the mother, while the other cell types are derived from the fetus. Moreover, the different hPMSCs exhibited unique gene expression profiles, which may prove advantageous in treatment of a broad range of diseases.

conclusionshPMSCs from different sources are similar yet also unique. Our results describe the biological characteristics of five hPMSCs and provide insights to aide in the selection process of candidates for MSCs treatment. Overall, UC- and CV-MSCs appear to be ideal sources of primary MSCs for clinical treatment and future research.

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem CellsCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCells, CulturedCell SeparationChorionFemaleHumansPlacentaPregnancyUmbilical CordBiological characteristicsCell cultureCell separation methodsEnzymatic digestionHuman placentaMesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)Tissue explant methodUmbilical cord

Identifiers

PMID32430063
PMCPMC7238656
OpenAlexW3026474049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.