ReviewCell transplantation
Intramedullary mesenchymal stromal cell transplantation in humans: Procedural safety and oncological risk reassessment.
Review in Cell transplantation. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intramedullary cellular transplantation within the human spinal cord has historically been regarded as a highly experimental intervention associated with substantial theoretical risk. However, cumulative clinical evidence progressively challenges this perception. Multiple early-phase clinical studies have demonstrated the technical feasibility and procedural tolerability of intramedullary and intralesional cellular delivery in spinal cord injury (SCI), employing heterogeneous cellular products, including bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), and neural stem cells. Despite considerable heterogeneity in cellular composition, dosing strategies, injection volumes, and delivery paradigms, severe injection-related complications remain uncommon. Reported adverse events are predominantly mild and transient, while procedure-induced neurological deterioration has not emerged as a reproducible safety signal. These observations suggest that controlled spinal cellular administration may represent a biologically tolerated intervention rather than an intrinsically destabilizing procedure. Beyond procedural considerations, long-term biological safety remains a central dimension of translational evaluation. While theoretical concerns persist - particularly regarding tumorigenesis, clonal selection, and potential genomic instability associated with
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.