ArticleMaterials today. Bio2026
Electrical stimulation and stem cell subdural implantation decrease microglia reactivity after spinal cord injury.
Article in Materials today. Bio, 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contusive spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to severe and permanent motor, sensory, and autonomic deficits, resulting from both the initial mechanical damage and subsequent secondary pathological cascades. Besides, electrical stimulation (ES) and stem cell therapies have emerged as promising strategies to promote axonal regeneration and neuronal plasticity. Methods: We designed a new implantable device, an Electro Pulsed Biohybrid (EPB) device, to provide local ES and carry stem cells (hMSC and iNSC) for subdural implantation, wired and wireless controlled. We assessed locomotion and sensory outputs, cell migration, neuroinflammation, gliosis, fibrosis, and neuronal survival. Results: The consecutive application of microsecond pulsed electric fields (μsPEFs) into two different configurations during ten days and further continuous current during five days significantly enhanced the migration and engraftment of the implanted hMSC and a significant reduction in the number of microglia injury-dependent reactive cells. The ES did not exacerbate gliosis, fibrosis, neuropathic pain, or neuronal loss after primary trauma, instead, the electrically stimulated animals in comparison with the non-stimulated controls were able to perform better reducing the time during running. Consistent results were obtained with a wireless and wired configuration for the ES supply. Conclusions: The applied sequence of μsPEFs and direct current local stimulation contributed to the early immunomodulation, reducing the acute immunoreactivity involved in further secondary damage, and enhanced implanted hMSC migration, providing a versatile platform for cell therapy and ES combinatorial approach in the SCI treatment.
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.