Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32399137›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of stem cells2020

Human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stem cells in peripheral nerve regeneration.

Christine Bojanic, Kendrick To, Bridget Zhang, Christopher Mak, Wasim S Khan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of stem cells, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Peripheral Nerve Injury Treatments and Advances: One Health Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Christine BojanicDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
Kendrick ToDivision of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
Bridget ZhangSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
Christopher MakSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
Wasim S KhanDivision of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom. wasimkhan@doctors.org.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeripheral nerve injury can occur as a result of trauma or disease and carries significant morbidity including sensory and motor loss. The body has limited ability for nerve regeneration and functional recovery. Left untreated, nerve lesions can cause lifelong disability. Traditional treatment options such as neurorrhaphy and neurolysis have high failure rates. Surgical reconstruction with autograft carries donor site morbidity and often provide suboptimal results. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are known to have promising regenerative potential and have gained attention as a treatment option for nerve lesions. It is however, unclear whether it can be effectively used for nerve regeneration.

aimTo evaluate the evidence for the use of human umbilical cord derived MSCs (UCMSCs) in peripheral nerve regeneration.

methodsWe carried out a systematic literature review in accordance with the PRISMA protocol. A literature search was performed from conception to September 2019 using PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. The results of eligible studies were appraised. A risk of bias analysis was carried out using Cochrane's RoB 2.0 tool.

resultsFourteen studies were included in this review. A total of 279 subjects, including both human and animal were treated with UCMSCs. Four studies obtained UCMSCs from a third-party source and the remainder were harvested by the investigators. Out of the 14 studies, thirteen conducted xenogenic transplantation into nerve injury models. All studies reported significant improvement in nerve regeneration in the UCMSC treated groups compared with the various different controls and untreated groups.

conclusionThe evidence summarised in this PRISMA systematic review of i

Indexed as

Mesenchymal stem cellsPeripheral nerve regenerationTransplantationUmbilical cord

Identifiers

PMID32399137
PMCPMC7202926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.