Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41495572›Full record

ArticleMolecular neurobiology2026

Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Hypoxia-Conditioned Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Their Extracellular Vesicles in a Spinal Cord Injury Rat Model.

Nhung T H Dinh, Hieu Ba Nguyen, Hai L D Nguyen, Trung-Chuc Nguyen, Hong-Nhung Dao, Duc Son Le, Quyen Thi Nguyen, Hoang-Phuong Nguyen, Xuan-Hai Do, Mao Van Can and 3 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular neurobiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

13 authors.

Nhung T H Dinh *Vinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Hieu Ba Nguyen *Department of Pathophysiology, Military Medical University, 160 Phung Hung, Hanoi, Ha Dong, Vietnam.
Hai L D NguyenVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Trung-Chuc NguyenDepartment of Pathophysiology, Military Medical University, 160 Phung Hung, Hanoi, Ha Dong, Vietnam.
Hong-Nhung DaoVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Duc Son LeVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Quyen Thi NguyenVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Hoang-Phuong NguyenVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Xuan-Hai DoDepartment of Practical and Experimental Surgery, Military Medical University, 160 Phung Hung, Hanoi, Ha Dong, Vietnam.
Mao Van CanDepartment of Pathophysiology, Military Medical University, 160 Phung Hung, Hanoi, Ha Dong, Vietnam.
Cuong Duy LeDepartment of Experimental Medicine, 108 Military Central Hospital, 1St Tran Hung Dao, Hanoi, Hai Ba Trung, Vietnam.
Van T HoangVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam. van.ht@vinuni.edu.vn.
Liem Nguyen ThanhVinmec Research Institute of Stem Cell and Gene Technology, College of Health Sciences, VinUniversity, Vinhomes Ocean Park, Gia Lam District, 1310, Hanoi, Vietnam. liem.nt@vinuni.edu.vn.

Funding

Vingroup Scientific Research and Clinical Application PRO2178
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and their extracellular vesicles (EVs) have both shown promise in spinal cord injury (SCI) treatment. While hypoxia preconditioning significantly enhances the therapeutic potential of both MSCs and EVs, a comparative analysis of safety and efficacy is still lacking. Given that EVs offer several advantages over MSCs - such as lower immunogenicity and ease of storage and delivery - this study aimed to determine whether hypoxic EVs could serve as a potent alternative to hypoxic MSC therapy. SCI rat models were established using the clip compression method and treated with three intrathecal injections of either hypoxia-preconditioned UC-MSCs (1 × 10⁶ cells) or their EVs (300 µg total protein, equivalent to 4.6 × 10

Indexed as

Extracellular VesiclesMesenchymal Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationSpinal Cord InjuriesAnimalsCell HypoxiaDisease Models, AnimalMaleRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyRecovery of FunctionSpinal CordTreatment OutcomeExtracellular vesiclesHypoxiaMesenchymal stem cellsSpinal cord injuryUmbilical cord

Identifiers

PMID41495572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.