ReviewJournal of translational medicine2026
Restoring neuroplasticity after CNS trauma: cell therapy approaches in spinal cord and traumatic brain injury.
Review in Journal of translational medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe central nervous system (CNS) has a limited regenerative capacity, rendering traumatic injuries such as spinal cord injury (SCI) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) highly disabling and difficult to treat. These insults trigger complex pathophysiological cascades, including extensive cell death, sustained inflammation, and the formation of a hostile inhibitory microenvironment that compromises neural plasticity and hampers tissue regeneration. The multifactorial nature of these mechanisms, together with a fragmented understanding of CNS plasticity, has hindered the development of effective therapeutic interventions. MAIN BODY: In recent years, cell-based therapies have emerged as promising strategies to support neural repair and induce pro-regenerative processes. This approach encompasses multiple cell types, including bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs), adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs), umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs), as well as neural progenitor cells (NPCs) and olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs). Clinical studies in SCI have reported functional improvements, particularly following treatment with BMSCs and peripheral blood-derived stem cells, although substantial methodological heterogeneity limits definitive conclusions. In TBI, clinical evidence remains more limited; however, preclinical studies consistently demonstrate the neuroprotective and regenerative potential of mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies. Beyond direct cell transplantation, increasing attention has been given to cell-free approaches, including secretome and extracellular vesicle-based strategies, which recapitulate many of the beneficial effects while potentially overcoming safety and logistical constraints.
conclusionsOverall, both cell-based and cell-free therapeutic strategies show significant potential to enhance neuroplasticity, attenuate secondary injury, and promote functional recovery following CNS trauma. Nevertheless, successful clinical translation will require larger, well-controlled trials and the establishment of standardized protocols addressing optimal timing, dosage, and routes of administration.
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.