The application of stem cell sheets for neuronal regeneration after spinal cord injury: a systematic review of pre-clinical studies.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Background Stem cell sheet implantation offers a promising avenue for spinal cord injury (SCI) and is currently under investigation in pre-clinical in vivo studies. Nevertheless, a systematic review of the relevant literature is yet to be performed. Thus, this systematic review aims to explore the efficacy of stem cell sheet technology in treating SCI, as indicated by experimental animal model studies. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Manuscripts that did not pertain to in vivo pre-clinical studies and those published in non-English languages were excluded. A risk assessment for bias was performed using the SYRCLE tool. Extracted data were synthesized only qualitatively because the data were not suitable for conducting the meta-analysis. Results Among the 847 studies retrieved from electronic database searches, seven met the inclusion criteria. Six of these studies employed a complete transection model, while one utilized a compression model. Stem cell sources included bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth, and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells. In all included studies, stem cell sheet application significantly improved motor and sensory functional scores compared to intreated SCI rats. This functional recovery correlated with histological improvements at the injury site. All studies are at low risk of b

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.