Stem cell therapy in spinal trauma: Does it have scientific validity?
Chhabra HS., Sarda K.
Clinical Trial on Spinal Cord Injury, published in Indian J Orthop (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
- 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
- Clinical Trial
- Journal
- Indian J Orthop (2015)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 25593357
- PMCID
- PMC4292327
- DOI
- 10.4103/0019-5413.143913
- Citations
- 12
Abstract (original English)
Stem cell-based interventions aim to use special regenerative cells (stem cells) to facilitate neuronal function beyond the site of the injury. Many studies involving animal models of spinal cord injury (SCI) suggest that certain stem cell-based therapies may restore function after SCI. Currently, in case of spinal cord injuries, new discoveries with clinical implications have been continuously made in basic stem cell research, and stem cell-based approaches are advancing rapidly toward application in patients. There is a huge base of preclinical evidence in vitro and in animal models which suggests the safety and clinical efficacy of cellular therapies after SCI. Despite this, data from clinical studies is not very encouraging and at times confounding. Here, we have attempted to cover preclinical and clinical evidence base dealing with safety, feasibility and efficacy of cell based interventions after SCI. The limitations of preclinical data and the reasons underlying its failure to translate in a clinical setting are also discussed. Based on the evidence base, it is suggested that a multifactorial approach is required to address this situation. Need for standardized, stringently designed multi-centric clinical trials for obtaining validated proof of evidence is also highlighted.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
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