The Efficacy of Different Material Scaffold-Guided Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury in Rats: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

IF 3.6 4区 医学 Q3 CELL BIOLOGY
Zhihua Wang, Jun Li, Tianqi Xu, Boyu Guo, Zhiping Xie, Meihua Li
{"title":"The Efficacy of Different Material Scaffold-Guided Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury in Rats: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.","authors":"Zhihua Wang, Jun Li, Tianqi Xu, Boyu Guo, Zhiping Xie, Meihua Li","doi":"10.1007/s10571-024-01465-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cell transplantation is a promising treatment option for spinal cord injury (SCI). However, there is no consensus on the choice of carrier scaffolds to host the cells. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of different material scaffold-mediated cell transplantation in treating SCI in rats. According to PRISMA's principle, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched, and relevant literature was referenced. Only original research on cell transplantation plus natural or synthetic scaffolds in SCI rats was included. Direct and indirect evidence for improving hind limb motor function was pooled through meta-analysis. A subgroup analysis of some factors that may affect the therapeutic effect was conducted to understand the results fully. In total, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, in which 293 rats received sham surgery, 78 rats received synthetic material scaffolds, and 219 rats received natural materials scaffolds. The network meta-analysis demonstrated that although synthetic scaffolds were slightly inferior to natural scaffolds in terms of restoring motor function in cell transplantation of SCI rats, no statistical differences were observed between the two (MD: -0.35; 95% CI -2.6 to 1.9). Moreover, the subgroup analysis revealed that the type and number of cells may be important factors in therapeutic efficacy (P < 0.01). Natural scaffolds and synthetic scaffolds are equally effective in cell transplantation of SCI rats without significant differences. In the future, the findings need to be validated in multicenter, large-scale, randomized controlled trials in clinical practice. Trial registration: Registration ID CRD42024459674 (PROSPERO).</p>","PeriodicalId":9742,"journal":{"name":"Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11069479/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-024-01465-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cell transplantation is a promising treatment option for spinal cord injury (SCI). However, there is no consensus on the choice of carrier scaffolds to host the cells. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of different material scaffold-mediated cell transplantation in treating SCI in rats. According to PRISMA's principle, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched, and relevant literature was referenced. Only original research on cell transplantation plus natural or synthetic scaffolds in SCI rats was included. Direct and indirect evidence for improving hind limb motor function was pooled through meta-analysis. A subgroup analysis of some factors that may affect the therapeutic effect was conducted to understand the results fully. In total, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, in which 293 rats received sham surgery, 78 rats received synthetic material scaffolds, and 219 rats received natural materials scaffolds. The network meta-analysis demonstrated that although synthetic scaffolds were slightly inferior to natural scaffolds in terms of restoring motor function in cell transplantation of SCI rats, no statistical differences were observed between the two (MD: -0.35; 95% CI -2.6 to 1.9). Moreover, the subgroup analysis revealed that the type and number of cells may be important factors in therapeutic efficacy (P < 0.01). Natural scaffolds and synthetic scaffolds are equally effective in cell transplantation of SCI rats without significant differences. In the future, the findings need to be validated in multicenter, large-scale, randomized controlled trials in clinical practice. Trial registration: Registration ID CRD42024459674 (PROSPERO).

Abstract Image

不同材料支架引导的细胞移植治疗大鼠脊髓损伤的疗效:系统综述与网络元分析》。
细胞移植是治疗脊髓损伤(SCI)的一种很有前景的方法。然而,在选择承载细胞的载体支架方面尚未达成共识。本研究旨在评估不同材料支架介导的细胞移植治疗大鼠脊髓损伤的疗效。根据PRISMA原则,检索了Embase、PubMed、Web of Science和Cochrane数据库,并参考了相关文献。只有关于细胞移植加天然或合成支架治疗 SCI 大鼠的原创性研究才被纳入。通过荟萃分析汇集了改善后肢运动功能的直接和间接证据。为了全面了解研究结果,还对可能影响治疗效果的一些因素进行了分组分析。共有25项研究符合纳入标准,其中293只大鼠接受了假手术,78只大鼠接受了合成材料支架,219只大鼠接受了天然材料支架。网络荟萃分析表明,虽然合成支架在恢复 SCI 大鼠细胞移植的运动功能方面略逊于天然支架,但两者之间没有统计学差异(MD:-0.35;95% CI -2.6-1.9)。此外,亚组分析显示,细胞的类型和数量可能是影响疗效的重要因素(P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
137
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology publishes original research concerned with the analysis of neuronal and brain function at the cellular and subcellular levels. The journal offers timely, peer-reviewed articles that describe anatomic, genetic, physiologic, pharmacologic, and biochemical approaches to the study of neuronal function and the analysis of elementary mechanisms. Studies are presented on isolated mammalian tissues and intact animals, with investigations aimed at the molecular mechanisms or neuronal responses at the level of single cells. Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology also presents studies of the effects of neurons on other organ systems, such as analysis of the electrical or biochemical response to neurotransmitters or neurohormones on smooth muscle or gland cells.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信