ReviewCell and tissue banking2026
Determinants of extraction efficiency in human amniotic membrane processing: biological, mechanical, and biochemical factors shaping growth factor yield.
Review in Cell and tissue banking, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human amniotic membrane extract (AME) contains growth factors that contribute to epithelial regeneration and immunomodulation. This review synthesizes current evidence and incorporates our recent preliminary experimental data to identify the critical parameters that influence the extraction efficiency of six key growth factors-EGF, HGF, TGF-β, bFGF, KGF, and NGF-from human amniotic membrane obtained via cesarean delivery. A comprehensive literature analysis was combined with empirical observations from our laboratory using cryogenic pulverization, differential buffer systems, protease inhibition strategies, and post-extraction stabilization techniques. Factor-specific biochemical behavior and matrix interactions were evaluated to outline optimized extraction conditions. Extraction efficiency was strongly dependent on: 1. preservation of epithelial and stromal integrity; 2. cryogenic pulverization for maximal cell lysis; 3. buffer composition, particularly the use of trehalose for protein stabilization; 4. heparin or high ionic strength solutions for releasing matrix-bound factors such as HGF, bFGF, and KGF; 5. EDTA-based protease control for NGF; and 6. sonication-assisted liberation of latent TGF-β complexes. Our practical study data confirm that an extraction protocol incorporating phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), trehalose, and cryo-milling substantially enhances the recovery of EGF, NGF, and TGF-β levels, while the addition of protease inhibitors to PBS and cryo-milling improves the concentrations of HGF, FGF, and TGF-β. AME yield is governed by a constellation of process-dependent variables that can be systematically optimized. Integrating biological tissue properties with precise mechanical and biochemical strategies enables the production of standardized, high potency extracts suitable for clinical and biobanking applications. Establishing these optimized conditions may support the development of GMP-compliant workflows and improve the therapeutic consistency of AME-based products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42207341What 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.