Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33818489›Full record

ReviewNeural regeneration research2021

Mesenchymal stem cell treatment for peripheral nerve injury: a narrative review.

Rui-Cheng Zhang, Wen-Qi Du, Jing-Yuan Zhang, Shao-Xia Yu, Fang-Zhi Lu, Hong-Mei Ding, Yan-Bo Cheng, Chao Ren, De-Qin Geng

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neural regeneration research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Rui-Cheng ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Wen-Qi DuDepartment of Human Anatomy, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Jing-Yuan ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, Shandong Province, China.
Shao-Xia YuDepartment of Neurology, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, Shandong Province, China.
Fang-Zhi LuDepartment of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Hong-Mei DingDepartment of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Yan-Bo ChengDepartment of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Chao RenDepartment of Neurology, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, Shandong Province, China.
De-Qin GengDepartment of Neurology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Xuzhou Medical College · CNWeatherford College · USYuhuangding Hospital · CNQingdao University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peripheral nerve injuries occur as the result of sudden trauma and lead to reduced quality of life. The peripheral nervous system has an inherent capability to regenerate axons. However, peripheral nerve regeneration following injury is generally slow and incomplete that results in poor functional outcomes such as muscle atrophy. Although conventional surgical procedures for peripheral nerve injuries present many benefits, there are still several limitations including scarring, difficult accessibility to donor nerve, neuroma formation and a need to sacrifice the autologous nerve. For many years, other therapeutic approaches for peripheral nerve injuries have been explored, the most notable being the replacement of Schwann cells, the glial cells responsible for clearing out debris from the site of injury. Introducing cultured Schwann cells to the injured sites showed great benefits in promoting axonal regeneration and functional recovery. However, there are limited sources of Schwann cells for extraction and difficulties in culturing Schwann cells in vitro. Therefore, novel therapeutic avenues that offer maximum benefits for the treatment of peripheral nerve injuries should be investigated. This review focused on strategies using mesenchymal stem cells to promote peripheral nerve regeneration including exosomes of mesenchymal stem cells, nerve engineering using the nerve guidance conduits containing mesenchymal stem cells, and genetically engineered mesenchymal stem cells. We present the current progress of mesenchymal stem cell treatment of peripheral nerve injuries.

Indexed as

axonal regenerationexosomesgenetic engineeringmesenchymal stem cellsneural conduitperipheral nerveperipheral nerve injuryperipheral nerve regenerationSchwann cellssudden trauma

Identifiers

PMID33818489
PMCPMC8354135
OpenAlexW3144941201

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.