| Title |
Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs) Therapy for Recovery of Fertility: a Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12015-017-9765-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zahra Fazeli, Atieh Abedindo, Mir Davood Omrani, Sayyed Mohammad Hossein Ghaderian |
| Abstract |
In recent years, the mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have provided the new opportunities to treat different disorders including infertility. Different studies have suggested that the MSCs have ability to differentiate into germ-like cells under specific induction conditions as well as transplantation to gonadal tissues. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the results obtained from different studies on MSCs therapy for promoting fertility. This search was done in PubMed and Science Direct databases using key words MSCs, infertility, therapy, germ cell, azoospermia, ovarian failure and mesenchymal stem cell. Among the more than 11,400 papers, 53 studies were considered eligible for more evaluations. The obtained results indicated that the most studies were performed on MSCs derived from bone marrow and umbilical cord as compared with the other types of MSCs. Different evaluations on animal models as well as in vitro studies supported from their role in the recovery of spermatogenesis and folliculogenesis. Although the data obtained from this systematic review are promising, but the further studies need to assess the efficiency and safety of transplantation of these cells in fertility recovery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 26 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 27 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2020.
All research outputs
#7,962,193
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#360
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,703
of 323,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,159 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.