ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Comparison of the Administration Route of Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes and Safety.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Human clinical evidence on stem cell-based therapies for ischemic stroke: An umbrella review with emphasis on mesenchymal stem cells.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Pooled it
- Stem cell-derived exosomes for ischemic stroke: a conventional and network meta-analysis based on animal models.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Intrathecal versus intravenous umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells for ischemic stroke sequelae.Stem cells translational medicine · 2025Trial
- Progress in Intra-Arterial Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Stroke: A Review.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Stem Cells in Post-Stroke Regenerative Therapy: Current Role of Wharton's Jelly Mesenchymal Stem Cells in the Orchestrum.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Potential of intranasal delivery of human mesenchymal stem cells and extracellular vesicles for stroke therapy.Acta biomaterialia · 2026Review
- Stem cell approaches for tendon repair: delusion or insight.The Journal of physiology · 2025Review
- A comprehensive review of clinical trials and Progress in stem cell therapies for advanced heart failure.Regenerative therapy · 2025Review
- Clinical trials and advanced MRI techniques with stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke: present and future perspectives.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- From Bench to Bedside: The Evolving Landscape of Stem Cell Therapies for Stroke Rehabilitation.Stem cells international · 2025Review
- Electroacupuncture Preconditioning Ameliorates the Ischemic Microenvironment to Improve Long-Term Potentiation in Chronic Cerebral Hypoperfusion Rats With MGE Neural Progenitor Transplantation.Neural plasticity · 2025Article
- Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB)-Crossing Strategies for Improved Treatment of CNS Disorders.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2024Article
- Research progress and challenges of stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stem cell treatment is emerging as an appealing alternative for stroke patients, but there still needs to be an agreement on the protocols in place, including the route of administration. This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the administration routes of stem cell treatment for ischemic stroke. A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was undertaken using the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. A total of 21 publications on stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke were included. Efficacy outcomes were measured using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and the Barthel index (BI). Intracerebral administration showed a better outcome than other routes, but a greater number of adverse events followed due to its invasiveness. Adverse events were shown to be related to the natural history of stroke not to the treatment. However, further investigation is required, since studies have yet to compare the different administration methods directly.
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.