Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33960512›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroscience research2021

Comparison of the effects of two therapeutic strategies based on olfactory ensheathing cell transplantation and repetitive magnetic stimulation after spinal cord injury in female mice.

Quentin Delarue, Amandine Robac, Romane Massardier, Jean-Paul Marie, Nicolas Guérout

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroscience research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Quentin DelarueNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA3830-GRHV, Rouen, France.
Amandine RobacNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA3830-GRHV, Rouen, France.
Romane MassardierNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA3830-GRHV, Rouen, France.
Jean-Paul MarieNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA3830-GRHV, Rouen, France.
Nicolas GuéroutNormandie Univ, UNIROUEN, EA3830-GRHV, Rouen, France.ORCID 0000-0003-0237-4981
Normandie Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a debilitating condition, which leads to a permanent loss of functions below the injury site. The events which take place after SCI are characterized by cellular death, release of inhibitory factors, and inflammation. Many therapies have been studied to cure SCI, among them magnetic stimulation aims to reduce the secondary damages in particular by decreasing apoptosis, while, cellular transplantation promotes neuroregeneration by enhancing axonal regrowth. In the present study, we compared individually primary olfactory ensheathing cell (OEC) transplantation and repetitive trans-spinal magnetic stimulation (rTSMS) and then, we combined these two therapeutic approaches on tissue repair and functional recovery after SCI. To do so, SCIs were performed at Th10 level on female C57BL/6 mice, which were randomized into four groups: SCI, SCI + primary bOECs, SCI + STM, SCI + primary bulbar olfactory ensheathing cells (bOECs) + stimulation (STM). On these animals bioluminescence, immunohistological, and behavioral experiments were performed after SCI. Our results show that rTSMS has beneficial effect on the modulation of spinal scar by reducing fibrosis, demyelination, and microglial cell activation and by increasing the astroglial component of the scar, while, primary bOEC transplantation decreases microglial reactivity. At the opposite, locotronic experiments show that both treatments induce functional recovery. We did not observed any additional effect by combining the two therapeutic approaches. Taken together, the present study indicates that primary bOEC transplantation and rTSMS treatment act through different mechanisms after SCI to induce functional recovery. In our experimental paradigm, the combination of the two therapies does not induce any additional benefit.

Indexed as

Recovery of FunctionAnimalsCell TransplantationFemaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLNerve RegenerationNeural Stem CellsOlfactory BulbRandom AllocationSpinal Cord InjuriesTranscranial Magnetic Stimulationglial scarmagnetic stimulationolfactory ensheathing cells and neuroregenerationrehabilitationRRID:AB_10563302: PDGFRβ, Abcam, ab91066RRID:AB_10643424: PE, poly4064, BioLegend, 406408RRID:AB_2313568: Jackson ImmunoResearch, 711-166-152RRID:AB_2340667: Jackson ImmunoResearch, 712-165-153RRID:AB_2340812: Jackson ImmunoResearch, 715-165-140RRID:AB_2715913: Alexa 488, MRG2b-85, BioLegendRRID:AB_306827: p75, Abcam, ab8874RRID:AB_476889: GFAP Cy3-conjugated Sigma-Aldrich, C9205RRID:AB_777165:P DGFRβAbcam ab32570RRID:AB_839504: Iba1, Wako, 019-19741RRID:AB_94975: MBP, Millipore, MAB386RRID:IMSR_JAX:008450: L2G85Chco+/+ (FVB-Tg(CAG-luc,-GFP)L2G85Chco/J)spinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID33960512
PMCPMC8359979
OpenAlexW3157813007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.