ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Electroacupuncture enhances mesenchymal stem cell therapy via improved perfusion and inflammation modulation in peripheral nerve injury: an IVIM-MRI study in rats.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Electroacupuncture enhances nerve regeneration and functional recovery in a rat model of median nerve transection.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stem cells are widely applied in peripheral nerve repair; however, their therapeutic potential is constrained by immune rejection, inflammatory responses, and a poor regenerative microenvironment. Therefore, reducing the inflammatory response, improving the regenerative environment and dynamically monitoring these processes by imaging techniques are critical. This study examined the effectiveness of electroacupuncture (EA) and bone mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) on acute sciatic nerve injury in rats. By employing intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) MRI, the study monitored perfusion and explored how EA improves the regenerative environment to optimize stem cell transplantation outcomes. Methods: Seventy-two rats were randomly assigned to four groups: EA, EA + BMSCs, BMSCs, and PBS. EA was applied at GB30 and ST36. IVIM-MRI (perfusion fraction f), T2WI, histological staining, immunostaining (CD31, IL-1α, IL-10, PPARγ), and SFI were used to evaluate treatment effects. Results: At 2-4 weeks, the nerve perfusion fraction f in the EA group recovered faster than in the BMSCs group ( Conclusion: EA is more effective than BMSCs alone in promoting nerve repair, enhancing blood flow, and reducing inflammation. Moreover, EA enhances the anti-inflammatory effects of BMSCs. The perfusion fraction (f) is a sensitive biomarker for evaluating nerve repair and perfusion restoration.
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.