2019
DOI: 10.1002/lt.25682
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Autologous Adipose Tissue–Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Introduced by Biliary Stents or Local Immersion in Porcine Bile Duct Anastomoses

Abstract: Background: Biliary complications (strictures and leaks), represent major limitations in livingdonor liver transplantation. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are a promising modality to prevent biliary complications owing to immunosuppressive and angiogenic properties. Our goal was to evaluate the safety of adipose-derived MSC delivery to biliary anastomoses in a porcine model. Secondary objectives were defining the optimal method of delivery (intraluminal vs extraluminal) and to investigate MSC engraftment, angiog… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two studies were published in 2020 with autologous ASCs. The first one is from Zhang et al [ 52 ]. Nine domestic white pigs were divided in three groups: G1 (control) received plastic biliary stents wrapped with Vicryl (polyglactin 910) mesh; in G2, 4 × 10 6 ASCs were added to the mesh; and G3 received non-wrapped stents and 4 × 10 6 ASCs applied topically.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two studies were published in 2020 with autologous ASCs. The first one is from Zhang et al [ 52 ]. Nine domestic white pigs were divided in three groups: G1 (control) received plastic biliary stents wrapped with Vicryl (polyglactin 910) mesh; in G2, 4 × 10 6 ASCs were added to the mesh; and G3 received non-wrapped stents and 4 × 10 6 ASCs applied topically.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ten records were further excluded for various reasons. Three studies were excluded due to focusing on biliary anastomoses (Hara et al [17], Zhang et al [18] and Ismail et al [19]), which were outside the scope of the present study. The study by Sukho et al [20] was excluded as it had duplicate data as a previous study by the same authors [21].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%