SynthesisFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2025
Assessment of mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of spinal cord injury: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phase-dependent efficacy of intravenous amniotic mesenchymal stem cells in a rat spinal cord injury model.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Article
- Emerging strategies for spinal cord injury repair: stem cells, extracellular vesicles, biomaterials, and neuromodulation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Clinical Insights into Mesenchymal Stem Cell Applications for Spinal Cord Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to explore the clinical efficacy of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) transplantation in the treatment of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) through a network meta-analysis and to discuss the optimal transplantation strategy for treatment. Methods: We conducted a computer search of clinical randomized controlled studies on MSC treatment for SCI in databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed) up to March 2024. Two researchers independently completed literature screening and data extraction according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and used RevMan 5.4 software to assess the quality of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 16.0 software. Results: A total of 18 studies were included in the analysis. The results showed that MSCs significantly improved motor, sensory, and activities of daily living activities after SCI. Network meta-analysis indicated that umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs) were the most effective cell source, and intrathecal injection (IT) was the optimal transplantation method. Conclusion: The study suggests that the current use of UCMSCs for IT transplantation may be the best transplantation strategy for improving functional impairment after SCI. Further high-quality studies are still needed to validate the results of this study and to ensure the reliability of the results. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier [CRD42023466102].
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.