Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury in Rat Models: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Wang Y., Ding Y., Guo C.
Meta-analysis on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Cell Transplant (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Meta-analysis
- Journal
- Cell Transplant (2024)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 38910431
- DOI
- 10.1177/09636897241262992
Abstract (original English)
Transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is one of the hopeful treatments for spinal cord injury (SCI). Most current studies are in animals, and less in humans, and the optimal transplantation strategy for MSCs is still controversial. In this article, we explore the optimal transplantation strategy of MSCs through a network meta-analysis of the effects of MSCs on SCI in animal models. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed) databases were searched by computer for randomized controlled studies on MSCs for SCI. Two investigators independently completed the literature screening and data extraction based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RevMan 5.4 software was used to assess the quality of the included literature. Stata 16.0 software was used for standard meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for continuous variables to combine the statistics and calculate 95% confidence interval (95% CI). P < 0.05 was considered a statistically significant difference. Cochrane's Q test and the I 2 value were used to indicate the magnitude of heterogeneity. A random-effects model was used if I 2 > 50% and P < 0.10 indicated significant heterogeneity be
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
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.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.
Related research
- Level ASystematic ReviewPubMed
Host immune determinants of stromal vascular fraction graft survival: Toward a concept of SVF therapy resistance - A systematic narrative review.
Systematic Review on Spinal Cord Injury, Chronic Inflammation, Immune Modulation, published in Cell Transplant (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
Cell Transplant - Level AMeta-analysisPubMed
Stem cell-derived exosome treatment for acute spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on preclinical evidence.
Meta-analysis on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Front Neurol (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2025
Front Neurol - Level ASystematic ReviewPubMed
Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) as biomarker in stem cell-based therapies of preclinical spinal cord injury models: A systematic review.
Systematic Review on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Tissue Cell (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2025
Tissue Cell3 citations - Level ASystematic ReviewEurope PMC
Revolutionizing neural regeneration with smart responsive materials: Current insights and future prospects
Systematic Review on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Bioact Mater (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2025
Bioact Mater5 citations - Level ASystematic ReviewEurope PMC
Conductive Nanocomposite Hydrogels for Neural Tissue Engineering: A Systematic Scoping Review of Recent Trends
Systematic Review with a reported sample of 42 on Diabetic Foot, Stroke Research, Spinal Cord Injury, Neuroinflammation, published in Adv Sci (Weinh) (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2025
- n = 42
Adv Sci (Weinh)18 citations - Level ASystematic ReviewEurope PMC
Emerging regenerative strategies for spinal cord injury: exosome-derived mechanisms and therapeutic insights
Systematic Review on Spinal Cord Injury, Neuroinflammation, published in Front Neurosci (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2025
Front Neurosci