ArticleScientific reports2025
Angiogenic and Immunomodulatory effects of embryonic stem cell derived mesenchymal stem cells in a murine model of ischemic hindlimb.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), failed revascularization and pharmacotherapy substantially increase amputation and mortality risks. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are a promising therapeutic option for CLTI. This study evaluated the therapeutic effects of embryonic stem cell-derived MSCs (E-MSCs) on inflammation and angiogenesis under ischemic conditions across different E-MSC doses. Hindlimb ischemia was induced in 85 BALB/c nude mice by cauterizing the femoral and branched arteries. The mice were divided into five groups: non-ischemia (G1); saline-treated ischemia (G2); and ischemia treated with E-MSCs at low, medium, and high doses (G3-G5). Therapeutic effects were assessed using the rotarod test, blood perfusion ratio, and histological and cytokine analyses. G1 exhibited normal blood perfusion and motor function, whereas E-MSC-treated groups (G3-G5) demonstrated improved perfusion compared to G2. Although the medium-dose group (G4) showed numerically greater recovery, differences between G3, G4, and G5 were not statistically significant, suggesting no dose-response. All E-MSC-treated groups exhibited reduced inflammation and increases in motor function and angiogenic factors. Histological analysis revealed enhanced myofiber regeneration, reduced inflammatory infiltration, and diminished collagen deposition in the ischemic muscle of G3-G5. These changes were observed across all dose groups without significant dose-dependent differences. These results suggest E-MSCs enhance blood perfusion and modulate inflammation and angiogenesis in ischemic limbs, regardless of dose. These findings support the therapeutic potential of E-MSCs in CLTI, although further investigation is needed to optimize dosing and elucidate the mechanisms involved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.