SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009
Bone marrow harvest versus peripheral stem cell collection for haemopoietic stem cell donation in healthy donors.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone marrow versus peripheral blood allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Unrelated adult stem cell donor medical suitability: recommendations from the World Marrow Donor Association Clinical Working Group Committee.Bone marrow transplantation · 2014Guideline
- Bone marrow versus peripheral blood allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Stem cell donation--what advice can be given to the donor?British journal of haematology · 2009Pooled it
- Trial
- Factors Influencing SVF Yields from Human Adipose Tissue: Isolation Technique, Age, and Sex.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Revolutionizing orofacial pain management: the promising potential of stem cell therapy.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Adverse events related to central venous catheters (CVC) and the influence of CVC characteristics on peripheral blood hematopoietic progenitor cell collection in children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Stem cells: a comprehensive review of origins and emerging clinical roles in medical practice.Orthopedic reviews · 2022Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 for the treatment of haematological diseases: a journey from bacteria to the bedside.British journal of haematology · 2021Review
- AMD3100 redosing fails to repeatedly mobilize hematopoietic stem cells in the nonhuman primate and humanized mouse.Experimental hematology · 2021Article
- Hematopoietic cell transplant nurse coordinators' perceptions of related donor care: a European survey from the EBMT Nurses Group.Bone marrow transplantation · 2020Article
- Review of Haploidentical Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.Journal of global oncology · 2018Review
- Experimental identification and computational characterization of a novel extracellular metalloproteinase produced byRSC advances · 2017Article
- Donor Selection for Allogenic Hemopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Clinical and Ethical Considerations.Stem cells international · 2017Review
- Article
- A novel murine model of Clostridium sordellii myonecrosis: Insights into the pathogenesis of disease.Anaerobe · 2016Article
- eNOS transfection of adipose-derived stem cells yields bioactive nitric oxide production and improved results in vascular tissue engineering.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2015Article
- Cell Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia.Stem cells international · 2015Review
- Sphingosine-1-phosphate promotes the differentiation of adipose-derived stem cells into endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) expressing endothelial-like cells.Journal of biomedical science · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHaemopoietic stem cells can be collected from a donor either as a bone marrow harvest or by peripheral blood collection. Both techniques have risks for the donor.
objectivesThe aim of this review was to identify the adverse effects of haemopoietic stem cell donation and to compare the tolerability and safety of the two methods. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, issue 2), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to May 2008. We also searched reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials enrolling haemopoietic stem cell donors and evaluating the different methods of donating haemopoietic stem cells were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened studies for inclusion. We extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. Quantitative analysis was not possible for most outcomes, but where used we preferred random-effects models due to the variability between the included studies. MAIN
resultsSix trials (807 donors) were eligible: all were substudies, or constituent parts of, larger randomised controlled trials of bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell allogeneic transplantation. No included trial was designed solely to measure and assess the experience of stem cell donors. The donors in all studies were related to the stem cell recipient. Overall, both types of donors experienced pain subsequent to donation, and psychological morbidity. The trend was for bone marrow donors to experience more pain at the donation site, more overall adverse events, and more days of restricted activity. They were also more likely to require hospitalisation than peripheral blood stem cell donors. In contrast, peripheral blood stem cell donors experienced more pain prior to donation, which may be related to the pre-donation administration of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). The methodological quality of the studies was poor and indicated limitations due to the risk of selection and attrition bias. The proportion of donors from the parent trial not included in the donor substudies was also inadequately explained. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe different short-term morbidities associated with each type of haemopoietic stem cell donation were clear, with bone marrow donors experiencing more pain and more restriction post-donation than peripheral blood donors. However, the studies were limited by their methodological quality, failure to provide long-term follow up (for which larger numbers of donors would be required) and a failure to apply consistent measures of quality of life in a way which allows more meaningful evaluation across studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.