SynthesisCell transplantation
Efficacy of cell transplantation for ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Cell transplantation. 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
Cell transplantation is a potential therapeutic strategy for ischemic stroke, but its clinical efficacy remains inconsistent. This meta-analysis evaluated functional outcomes at different follow-up time points, as well as neuroimaging and paracrine biomarkers. A systematic search of Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 31, 2025 identified 21 randomized controlled trials involving 1,269 patients. The analysis showed that cell transplantation improved NIHSS at 6 and 12 months and final follow-up; mRS at 12 months and final follow-up; and BI at 3 and 6 months and final follow-up. Functional independence increased as measured by mRS scores at 0-1 and 0-2 at 12 months and by BI ≥90 or 95 at 3 and 12 months and final follow-up. MSCs improved NIHSS and BI, EPCs improved NIHSS and mRS, whereas MNCs showed no statistically significant effects. BBB-bypassing delivery demonstrated consistent efficacy. Transplantation within 10 days or after 90 days showed beneficial effects. Fugl-Meyer assessment scores and VEGF increased after cell transplantation, while infarct volume and DTI-FA showed no change. Cell transplantation induced functional benefits. Efficacy may depend on cell type, delivery strategy, and timing of transplantation, underscoring the critical influence of these variables on therapeutic outcomes.
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.