SynthesisFrontiers in stroke2023
Efficacy and safety of intravenous mesenchymal stem cells for ischemic stroke patients, a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in stroke, 2023. 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Mesenchymal stromal/stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles in brain disorders: mechanisms of repair and recovery.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Applications of Engineered Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Enhanced Angiogenesis in Cardiac and Cerebral Ischemia.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of intravenous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for acute and subacute ischemic stroke. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of intravenous MSC treatments compared to placebo for acute and subacute ischemic stroke patients. Methods: We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials evaluating any clinical trials of intravenous MSCs for acute and subacute ischemic stroke patients. The efficacy outcomes of this study were the rates of improvement in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores, good scores on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and Barthel Index (BI) scores, while the safety outcomes were the rates of mortality and stroke recurrence. We compared intravenous MSC and placebo treatments on a fixed-effect meta-analysis model in R software. Results: Four randomized controlled studies involving 97 patients were included in the analysis. In the meta-analysis, MSC treatments were superior to placebo treatments in good mRS (MD -0.95, 95% CI [-1.39, -0.52]) or BI (MD 21.36, 95% CI [9.96, 32.75]) scores, and MSC treatments were not superior to placebo treatments in the rate of improvement of the NIHSS scores (MD -1.81, 95% CI [-4.123, 0.494]). MSCs were associated with neither decreased mortality nor stroke recurrence (risk ratio 0.58 and 0.59, respectively; Conclusion: For patients with acute and subacute ischemic stroke who are eligible for further damage to neural tissue, MSCs achieve high efficacy and acceptable safety. Systematic review registration: Prospero, unique ID: CRD42023457655.
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.