Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37758115›Full record

ArticleThe ocular surface2023

Intrastromal versus subconjunctival injection of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells for promoting corneal repair.

Mohammad Soleimani, Reza Mirshahi, Kasra Cheraqpour, Seyed Mahbod Baharnoori, Hamed Massoumi, Collin Chow, Sumaiya Shahjahan, Bita Momenaei, Mohammad Javad Ashraf, Raghuram Koganti and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ocular surface, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Therapeutic Exosomes CarryingBiomedicines · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Biomedical Application of MSCs in Corneal Regeneration and Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

14 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Mohammad SoleimaniDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; Eye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: msolei2@uic.edu.
Reza MirshahiEye Research Center, The Five Senses Health Institute, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: rezamirshahi@gmail.com.
Kasra CheraqpourEye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Electronic address: cheraqpourk@gmail.com.
Seyed Mahbod BaharnooriDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: sbahar2@uic.edu.
Hamed MassoumiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: hmasso2@uic.edu.
Collin ChowRosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: colin.chow@my.rfums.org.
Sumaiya ShahjahanDes Moines University, Des Moines, IA, USA. Electronic address: sumaiyaa522@gmail.com.
Bita MomenaeiWills Eye Hospital, Mid Atlantic Retina, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: bmomenaei@midatlanticretina.com.
Mohammad Javad AshrafDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: mashra5@uic.edu.
Raghuram KogantiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: rkogan3@uic.edu.
Mahmood GhassemiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: ghassemi@uic.edu.
Khandaker N AnwarDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: kanwar@uic.edu.
Elmira JalilianDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: jalilian@uic.edu.
Ali R DjalilianDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: adjalili@uic.edu.
University of Illinois Chicago · USDes Moines University · USFarabi Hospital · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRRosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science · USThomas Jefferson University · US

Funding

Translational Core for Therapeutic and Diagnostic DevelopmentP30EY001792 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI AAKALU, VINAY · 1985 to 2025
$14.8M
Novel Therapies for Ocular Chemical InjuriesR01EY024349 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI DJALILIAN, ALI R · 2015 to 2020
$2.1M
Phase I Study of Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Secretome for Promoting Corneal RegenerationUH3EY031809 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI ALI R DJALILIAN · 2021 to 2026
$1.6M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY001792NEI NIH HHS R01 EY024349NEI NIH HHS UH3 EY031809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDifferent approaches to delivery of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) for ameliorating corneal injuries have been investigated. This study was aimed to compare the efficacy of intrastromal and subconjunctival injection of human bone marrow-derived MSCs (hBM-MSCs) in a corneal epithelial injury model.

methodsTwenty-four C57BL/6J mice underwent total corneal and limbal epithelial debridement. Then, the mice were divided into three different groups: (1) intrastromal hBM-MSCs injection, (2) subconjunctival hBM-MSCs injection, and (3) injection of frozen medium as a control. Mice were monitored by slit lamp and underwent anterior segment optical coherence tomography (ASOCT). Following euthanasia, the corneas were further evaluated by histology and immunostaining.

resultshBM-MSC injection successfully healed epithelial defects regardless of the delivery route (P < 0.001). However, intrastromal injection was superior to subconjunctival injection in reducing defect area (P = 0.001). Intrastromal injection of hBM-MSCs also significantly reduced corneal opacity and neovascularization and improved ASOCT parameters compared to subconjunctival injection or no treatment (P < 0.001, P = 0.003, and P < 0.001, respectively). Although both of the treatment groups were positive for CK12 and had reduced levels of MUC5AC compared to the control, CK12 staining was stronger in the intrastromal group compared to the subconjunctival group. Also, persistency of MSCs was confirmed by in vivo (up to 2 weeks) and in vitro assessments (up to 4 weeks).

conclusionsAlthough the injection of hBM-MSC using both intrastromal and subconjunctival methods improve wound healing and reduce neovascularization and opacity, the intrastromal approach is superior in terms of corneal healing.

Indexed as

Corneal InjuriesCorneal OpacityMesenchymal Stem CellsAnimalsCorneaDisease Models, AnimalHumansMiceMice, Inbred C57BLIntrastromalLimbal stem cell deficiencyLSCDMesenchymal stem cellsMSCsSubconjunctival

Identifiers

PMID37758115
PMCPMC10841412
OpenAlexW4387007671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.