Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

Intramedullary mesenchymal stromal cell transplantation in humans: Procedural safety and oncological risk reassessment.

Nonnarath C., Serratrice N.

Narrative Review on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Cell Transplant (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
Narrative Review
Journal
Cell Transplant (2026)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
42415699
DOI
10.1177/09636897261466805

Abstract (original English)

Intramedullary cellular transplantation within the human spinal cord has historically been regarded as a highly experimental intervention associated with substantial theoretical risk. However, cumulative clinical evidence progressively challenges this perception. Multiple early-phase clinical studies have demonstrated the technical feasibility and procedural tolerability of intramedullary and intralesional cellular delivery in spinal cord injury (SCI), employing heterogeneous cellular products, including bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), and neural stem cells. Despite considerable heterogeneity in cellular composition, dosing strategies, injection volumes, and delivery paradigms, severe injection-related complications remain uncommon. Reported adverse events are predominantly mild and transient, while procedure-induced neurological deterioration has not emerged as a reproducible safety signal. These observations suggest that controlled spinal cellular administration may represent a biologically tolerated intervention rather than an intrinsically destabilizing procedure. Beyond procedural considerations, long-term biological safety remains a central dimension of translational evaluation. While theoretical concerns persist - particularly regarding tumorigenesis, clonal selection, and potential genomic instability associated with ex vivo MSC

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
HumansMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationMesenchymal Stem CellsSpinal Cord InjuriesAnimals

Browse all related research

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

Related research