Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31638100›Full record

ArticleNeural regeneration research2020

Effects of neural stem cell transplantation on the motor function of rats with contusion spinal cord injuries: a meta-analysis.

Kai Qian, Tuo-Ye Xu, Xi Wang, Tao Ma, Kai-Xin Zhang, Kun Yang, Teng-Da Qian, Jing Shi, Li-Xin Li, Zheng Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neural regeneration research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The roles and applications of neural stem cells in spinal cord injury repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kai QianDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Tuo-Ye XuDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Xi WangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Tao MaDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing; Department of Neurosurgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Kai-Xin ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province; Department of Neurosurgery, Huangshan City People's Hospital, Huangshan, Anhui Province, China.
Kun YangDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University; Department of Neurosurgery, Nanjing Brain Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Teng-Da QianDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing; Department of Neurosurgery, Jintan Hospital Affiliated to Jiangsu University, Jintan, Jiangsu Province, China.
Jing ShiDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Li-Xin LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Zheng WangDepartment of Gerontology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Jiangsu Province Hospital · CNNanjing Medical University · CNSoochow University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo judge the efficacies of neural stem cell (NSC) transplantation on functional recovery following contusion spinal cord injuries (SCIs). DATA SOURCES: Studies in which NSCs were transplanted into a clinically relevant, standardized rat model of contusion SCI were identified by searching the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases, and the extracted data were analyzed by Stata 14.0. DATA SELECTION: Inclusion criteria were that NSCs were used in in vivo animal studies to treat contusion SCIs and that behavioral assessment of locomotor functional recovery was performed using the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan lo-comotor rating scale. Exclusion criteria included a follow-up of less than 4 weeks and the lack of control groups. OUTCOME MEASURES: The restoration of motor function was assessed by the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan locomotor rating scale.

resultsWe identified 1756 non-duplicated papers by searching the aforementioned electronic databases, and 30 full-text articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 37 studies reported in the 30 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed that transplanted NSCs could improve the motor function recovery of rats following contusion SCIs, to a moderate extent (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47-1.00; P < 0.001). NSCs obtained from different donor species (rat: SMD = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.36-1.13; human: SMD = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.31-1.25), at different donor ages (fetal: SMD = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.43-0.92; adult: SMD = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.50-1.22) and from different origins (brain-derived: SMD = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.27-0.91; spinal cord-derived: SMD = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.22-0.79) had similar efficacies on improved functional recovery; however, adult induced pluripotent stem cell-derived NSCs showed no significant efficacies. Furthermore, the use of higher doses of transplanted NSCs or the administration of immunosuppressive agents did not promote better locomotor function recovery (SMD = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.21-0.70). However, shorter periods between the contusion induction and the NSC transplantation showed slightly higher efficacies (acute: SMD = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.81-1.63; subacute: SMD = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.42-1.09). For chronic injuries, NSC implantation did not significantly improve functional recovery (SMD = 0.25; 95% CI: -0.16 to 0.65).

conclusionNSC transplantation alone appears to be a positive yet limited method for the treatment of contusion SCIs.

Indexed as

and Bresnahan locomotor rating scale; cell transplantation; meta-analysis; motor functional recovery; neural regeneration; neural stem cell; neural stem cell transplantation; rat model; spinal contusion; spinal cord injuryBassoBeattie

Identifiers

PMID31638100
PMCPMC6975148
OpenAlexW2980983555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.