Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Electrical stimulation and stem cell subdural implantation decrease microglia reactivity after spinal cord injury

Mannino L., Marracino P., Roca FG., Lopez-Mocholi E., Pedraza-Boti M., Bernardi D.

Laboratory Study on Spinal Cord Injury, Neuroinflammation, Immune Modulation, published in Mater Today Bio (2026) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
Mater Today Bio (2026)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
42317520
PMCID
PMC13273593
DOI
10.1016/j.mtbio.2026.103329

Abstract (original English)

Background Contusive spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to severe and permanent motor, sensory, and autonomic deficits, resulting from both the initial mechanical damage and subsequent secondary pathological cascades. Besides, electrical stimulation (ES) and stem cell therapies have emerged as promising strategies to promote axonal regeneration and neuronal plasticity. Methods We designed a new implantable device, an Electro Pulsed Biohybrid (EPB) device, to provide local ES and carry stem cells (hMSC and iNSC) for subdural implantation, wired and wireless controlled. We assessed locomotion and sensory outputs, cell migration, neuroinflammation, gliosis, fibrosis, and neuronal survival. Results The consecutive application of microsecond pulsed electric fields (μsPEFs) into two different configurations during ten days and further continuous current during five days significantly enhanced the migration and engraftment of the implanted hMSC and a significant reduction in the number of microglia injury-dependent reactive cells. The ES did not exacerbate gliosis, fibrosis, neuropathic pain, or neuronal loss after primary trauma, instead, the electrically stimulated animals in comparison with the non-stimulated controls were able to perform better reducing the time during running. Consistent results were obtained with a wireless and wired configuration for the ES supply. Conclusions The

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

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

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research