SynthesisThe Journal of international medical research2026
Human clinical evidence on stem cell-based therapies for ischemic stroke: An umbrella review with emphasis on mesenchymal stem cells.
Synthesis in The Journal of international medical research, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo synthesize human clinical evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on stem cell-based therapies for ischemic stroke, with an emphasis on mesenchymal stem cell-based interventions, and to appraise their efficacy, safety, methodological quality, overlap, and certainty of evidence.MethodsThis Open Science Framework-registered umbrella review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 and Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through 1 November 2025. Eligible studies were systematic reviews or meta-analyses of randomized or nonrandomized human clinical studies evaluating mesenchymal stem cells or related stem cell-based interventions for ischemic stroke. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2) appraisal, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation)-based certainty assessment. Because of overlap among reviews and heterogeneity in cell products, administration routes, timing, and outcomes, the findings were synthesized narratively rather than through a de novo meta-analysis.ResultsTwenty-six reviews were included. The evidence suggested possible improvements in neurological impairment, disability, activities of daily living, and motor recovery; however, effect estimates varied according to cell type, administration route, timing after stroke, and follow-up duration. Intravenous administration was the most frequently studied and appeared feasible, with acceptable short-term safety reporting, whereas intra-arterial and intracerebral routes showed greater procedure-related concerns. Short-term adverse events were not consistently increased. However, the evidence remains insufficient regarding rare or delayed risks, including tumorigenesis, ectopic tissue formation, embolic events, and alloimmunogenicity. The certainty of evidence was low to moderate for most efficacy outcomes, moderate for short-term adverse events, and very low to low for long-term or rare safety outcomes.ConclusionsStem cell-based therapies, particularly mesenchymal stem cell-based approaches, may improve selected neurological and functional outcomes after ischemic stroke. However, overlapping reviews, heterogeneous interventions, small early-phase trials, and limited long-term follow-up require cautious interpretation. Adequately powered, standardized, multicenter trials with long-term safety surveillance are needed before routine clinical implementation.
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.