SynthesisStem cell research & therapy2022
Safety, efficacy and biomarkers analysis of mesenchymal stromal cells therapy in ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on phase I and II RCTs.
Synthesis in Stem cell research & therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells and their derived extracellular vesicles for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of umbilical cord mesenchymal stromal cells for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Review
- Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cell Extracellular Vesicle Treatment of Respiratory Failure from COVID-19: Endpoint Analysis of Expanded Access Safety Trial.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Article
- Review
- IL-1β modulates inflammatory response of human bone marrow-derived MSCs and neutrophil recruitment in vitro via NF-kB-associated signaling.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- The safety and efficacy of human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell for acute respiratory distress syndrome: an open-label and multicenter phase 1 clinical trial.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Beyond immunomodulation: mechanisms and synergistic strategies of mesenchymal stem cells in promoting alveolar epithelial and endothelial repair in ARDS.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Endothelial dysfunction triggers acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with sepsis: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an emerging treatment, but most of the current trials of MSCs stay in the animal experimental stage, and the safety and efficacy of MSCs in clinical application are not clear. We aimed to analyze the safety, efficacy and biomarkers of mesenchymal stromal cells in the treatment of ARDS.
methodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science, CNKI, VIP and Wan Fang data, studies published between database inception and Mar 17, 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCT) of stem cell interventions for ARDS were included, without language or date restrictions. We did separate meta-analyses for mortality, subjects with adverse events (AEs) and subjects with serious adverse events (SAEs). Since the trials data are dichotomous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) is adopted for meta-analysis. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
findingsIn total, 5 trials involving 171 patients with ARDS were included in this meta-analysis. A total of 99 individuals were randomly assigned to receive MSCs treatment, and 72 were randomly assigned to receive placebo treatment. Treatment with MSCs appeared to increase the occurrence of adverse events, but this result was not statistically significant (OR, 1.58; 95%CI, 0.64-3.91; P = 0.32). The occurrence of serious adverse events was lower in the MSCs group than in the placebo group (OR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.14-2.32; P = 0.43); there seems to be no significant difference between the two groups in terms of 28 days mortality (OR, 0.93; 95%CI, 0.45-1.89); oxygenation index and biomarkers showed a tendency to improve in treatment, but there was a lack of more statistically significant clinical evidence to support them.
interpretationBased on the current clinical trials, MSCs intervention has some safety for ARDS patients, but its effectiveness and predictive value of airspace biomarkers need to be determined by more large-scale, standard randomized controlled trials.
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.