ArticleStem cell reviews and reports2026
The Potential of Menstrual Blood-Derived Extracellular Vesicles (MenMSC-Evs) in Combination with Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF) as a Biological Adjuvant for Improving Full-Thickness Wound Healing.
Article in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Breaking barriers in peritoneal fibrosis: extracellular vesicles as promising diagnostic and therapeutic strategy.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Neural Stem Cells in Multiple Sclerosis: A Comprehensive Review of Preclinical and Clinical Evidence for CNS Repair and Translational Hurdles.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Full-thickness wound healing, particularly in chronic wounds, has remained a significant clinical challenge due to limited regenerative therapies and immune responses. Although the different biologic-based combination therapies have been suggested, the effective and safe biological adjuvants require further research and development to optimize their potential for wound healing. This study investigates the synergistic effect of menstrual blood mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MenMSC-Evs) combined with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on full-thickness wound healing. In this context, the MenMSC-Evs and PRF were first assessed in vitro (n = 3) for their antibacterial efficacy against E. coli, S. aureus, and P. aeruginosa. The impact of MenMSC-Evs on the proliferation and migration of HUVECs and NIH3T3 cells was evaluated to determine their influence on cellular behaviors. In vivo, a full-thickness excisional wound model was established on nine Wistar rats, with four wounds per rat assigned to different treatment groups, to evaluate wound healing. In vitro, MenMSC-Evs significantly enhanced the proliferation and migration of HUVECs by 29.3% and 11.5%, respectively, and NIH3T3 cells by 24.7% and 8.5% (p < 0.01, p < 0.001). PRF-Evs also demonstrated improved antibacterial activity, particularly against S. aureus (p < 0.001). In vivo, PRF-Evs accelerated wound closure by 23.2% (p < 0.001), increased collagen deposition (p < 0.001), and promoted angiogenesis, as evidenced by a 1.9-fold increase in VEGF-A expression and a 3.1-fold rise in CD34-positive microvessel density (p < 0.001). Moreover, PRF-Evs modulated macrophage polarization by reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines-IL-1β (8.2-fold) and TNF-α (4.4-fold)-while upregulating anti-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-10 (3.2-fold) and TGF-β (2.7-fold) (p < 0.001). In conclusion, these findings indicate that the novel combination of MenMSC-Evs and PRF offers a promising cell-free therapeutic strategy for chronic wound management by enhancing immunomodulation, promoting neovascularization, and facilitating tissue regeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41094193What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.