| Literature DB >> 25209445 |
Hongbin Cheng, Xuebin Liu, Rongrong Hua, Guanghui Dai, Xiaodong Wang, Jianhua Gao, Yihua An.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs) have a considerable advantage and potential in treating for central nervous system diseases and have become a novel alternative treatment for spinal cord injury. This study aims to compare the neurological function outcome of stem cell transplantation, rehabilitation therapy, and self-healing for sequelae of spinal cord injury.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25209445 PMCID: PMC4172930 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-014-0253-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
General information of the patients in the three groups
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCMSC group | 35.30 ± 8.23 | 21.40 ± 12.96 | [12,50] | A |
| Rehabilitation group | 36.64 ± 9.90 | 18.57 ± 11.35 | [12,55] | A |
| Blank control group | 32.40 ± 7.72 | 30.70 ± 19.99 | [12,52] | A |
Figure 1Flow cytometry analysis for UCMSCs. The levels of CD105, CD90, CD73 and CD44 were higher than 95%, whereas CD19, CD45, CD11b or CD34 were lower than 5%.
Figure 2A sagittal image: the needle reached the spinal cord. The red line 1 indicates the subarachnoid; the red line 2 indicates the spinal cord; the red line 3 indicates the needle.
Figure 3An axial (transverse) image: the needle reached the spinal cord. The red line 1 indicates the spinal cord; the red line 2 indicates the needle; the red line 3 indicates the subarachnoid.
Comparison of the assessments before and 6 months after stem cell treatment
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 146.60 ± 22.35 [104,168] | 54.00 ± 11.48 [40,80] | 9.90 ± 8.00 [0,20] | 33.50 ± 6.69 [25,45] |
| After treatment | 148.30 ± 20.99 [110,184] | 58.00 ± 12.42 [45,89] | 8.50 ± 7.43 [0,20] | 41.40 ± 6.42 [30,50] |
|
| 0.052 | 0.012 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Comparison of the assessment before and 6 months after rehabilitation therapy
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 147.57 ± 29.63 [88,224] | 55. 00 ± 6.66 [50,67] | 14.29 ± 11.74 [0,38] | 37.86 ± 17.94 [25,75] |
| After treatment | 148.12 ± 23.33 [88,224] | 56.64 ± 9.09 [50,74] | 16.00 ± 13.34 [0,38] | 38.21 ± 17.72 [10,75] |
|
| - | 0.140 | 0.165 | 0.336 |
Comparison of the assessment before and 6 months later in control group
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | 140.60 ± 4.00 [136,144] | 50.90 ± 0.23 [50,51] | 3.40 ± 4.72 [0,10] | 35.00 ± 8.17 [30,55] |
| After treatment | 141.45 ± 3.12 [136,148] | 52.56 ± 0.11 [50,51] | 3.41 ± 3.62 [0,10] | 33.16 ± 9.68 [35,60] |
|
| - | - | - | - |
Results of urodynamic analysis before and 6 months after stem cell treatment
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Before transplantation | 9.26 ± 11.74 [0,33.5] | 389.50 ± 176.12 [140,600] | 84.20 ± 94.60 [0,300] | 60.00 ± 42.60 [0,120] |
| After transplantation | 11.50 ± 17.50 [0,57.7] | 505.30 ± 106.37 [322,655] | 38.80 ± 51.49 [322,655] | 33.14 ± 34.94 [0,98] |
|
| 0.515 | 0.009 | 0.163 | 0.023 |
Results of urodynamic analysis before and 6 months after stem cell treatment
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Before transplantation | 3.7 ± 5.12 | 433. 00 ± 41.17 | 54.00 ± 57.71 | 17.60 ± 39.35 |
| [0,10.3] | [400,500] | [0,150] | [0,88] | |
| After transplantation | 2.62 ± 3.90 | 397.00 ± 63.06 | 186.00 ± 115.02 | 19.00 ± 42.49 |
| [0,8.7] | [330,500] | [30,350] | [0,95] | |
|
| 0.222 | 0.043 | 0.082 | 0.374 |