Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 599

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 178 of the 178 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Isolation, cultivation, and characterization of human mesenchymal stem cells

Mushahary, Dolly, Spittler, Andreas, Kasper, Cornelia, Weber, Viktoria, Charwat, Verena·2018·Cytometry Part A

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) exhibit a high self‐renewal capacity, multilineage differentiation potential and immunomodulatory properties. This set of exceptional features makes them an attractive tool for research and clinical application. However, MSC are far from being a uniform cell type, which makes standardization difficult. The exact properties of human MSC (hMSC) can vary greatly depending on multiple parameters including tissue source, isolation method and medium composition. In this review we address the most important influence factors. We highlight variations in the differentiation potential of MSC from different tissue sources. Furthermore, we compare enzymatic isolation strategies with explants cultures focusing on adipose tissue and umbilical cords as two relevant examples. Additionally, we address effects of medium composition and serum supplementation on MSC expansion and differentiation. The lack of standardized methods for hMSC isolation and cultivation mandates careful evaluation of different protocols regarding efficiency and cell quality. MSC characterization based on a set of minimal criteria defined by the International Society for Cellular Therapy is a widely accepted practice, and additional testing for MSC functionality can provide valuable supplementary information. The MSC secretome has been identified as an important signaling mechanism to affect other cells. In this context, extracellular vesicles (EVs) are attracting increasing interest. The thorough characterization of MSC‐derived EVs and their interaction with target cells is a crucial step toward a more complete understanding of MSC‐derived EV functionality. Here, we focus on flow cytometric approaches to characterize free as well as cell bound EVs and address potential differences in the bioactivity of EVs derived from stem cells from different sources. © 2017 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cyto.a.23242

Cites

178 of 178 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 178 references

Cited by

See all 599

Metadata

Authors
Mushahary, D., Spittler, A., Kasper, C., Weber, V., & Charwat, V.
Venue
Cytometry Part A
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-26
Volume
93
Issue
1
Pages
19-31
ISSN
  • 1552-4922 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4930
OpenAlex
W2766971919
Cited by
599
References
178
FWCI
12.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Isolation, cultivation, and characterization of human mesenchymal stem cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cyto.a.23242
The paper
Mushahary, D., Spittler, A., Kasper, C., Weber, V., & Charwat, V. (2018). Isolation, cultivation, and characterization of human mesenchymal stem cells. Cytometry Part A. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.23242

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.