Author's reply.

Sir,

I am glad that author1 has shown keen interest in our article “Stem cell therapy in spinal trauma: Does it have scientific validity?”2 We appreciate author's support on our view regarding the necessity of a multifactorial approach towards achieving repair and regeneration following spinal cord injury (SCI). We agree with the author's views that it is important for every spine surgeon to understand and work under the purview of the national and international legal as well as ethical regulations underlying stem cell research.

Our article too clearly states that “until now, no promising cell therapies that are safe and effective for SCI patients have been achieved” and that “initiatives of various associations in educating clinicians, as well as individuals regarding cellular therapies and clinical trial design in case of SCI, go a long way in promoting moral, ethical and scientifically validated use of cellular interventions.”

As the title suggests, our article was aimed at summarizing the validated preclinical and clinical scientific evidence from published studies regarding the efficacy of cellular interventions for achieving spinal cord repair and regeneration. It clearly states that we are nowhere near to providing substantiated proof of efficacy of such interventions. The legal and regulatory aspect of undertaking stem cell research is a vast and separate topic and was beyond the scope of this article.