Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Drug delivery, cell-based therapies, and tissue engineering approaches for spinal cord injury

Kabu S., Gao Y., Kwon BK., Labhasetwar V.

Narrative Review on Spinal Cord Injury, Neuroinflammation, published in J Control Release (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
J Control Release (2015)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
26343846
PMCID
PMC4656085
DOI
10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.08.060
Citations
134

Abstract (original English)

Spinal cord injury (SCI) results in devastating neurological and pathological consequences, causing major dysfunction to the motor, sensory, and autonomic systems. The primary traumatic injury to the spinal cord triggers a cascade of acute and chronic degenerative events, leading to further secondary injury. Many therapeutic strategies have been developed to potentially intervene in these progressive neurodegenerative events and minimize secondary damage to the spinal cord. Additionally, significant efforts have been directed toward regenerative therapies that may facilitate neuronal repair and establish connectivity across the injury site. Despite the promise that these approaches have shown in preclinical animal models of SCI, challenges with respect to successful clinical translation still remain. The factors that could have contributed to failure include important biologic and physiologic differences between the preclinical models and the human condition, study designs that do not mirror clinical reality, discrepancies in dosing and the timing of therapeutic interventions, and dose-limiting toxicity. With a better understanding of the pathobiology of events following acute SCI, developing integrated approaches aimed at preventing secondary damage and also facilitating neuroregenerative recovery is possible and hopefully will lead to effective treatments for this devastating

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsHumansSpinal Cord InjuriesDrug Delivery SystemsTissue EngineeringGenetic TherapyCell- and Tissue-Based Therapy

Browse all related research

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

Related research