Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Neural stem cell treatment for perinatal brain injury: A systematic review and meta#8208;analysis of preclinical studies
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Neural stem cell treatment for perinatal brain injury: A systematic review and meta#8208;analysis of preclinical studies
Do you wish to request the book?
Neural stem cell treatment for perinatal brain injury: A systematic review and meta#8208;analysis of preclinical studies
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Neural stem cell treatment for perinatal brain injury: A systematic review and meta#8208;analysis of preclinical studies
2021
Overview
Perinatal brain injury can lead to significant neurological and cognitive deficits and currently no therapies can regenerate the damaged brain. Neural stem cells (NSCs) have the potential to engraft and regenerate damaged brain tissue. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the preclinical literature to determine whether NSC administration is more effective than controls in decreasing perinatal brain injury. Controlled interventional studies of NSC therapy using animal models of perinatal brain injury were identified using MEDLINE and Embase. Primary outcomes were brain infarct size, motor, and cognitive function. Data for meta‐analysis were synthesized and expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using a random effects model. We also reported secondary outcomes including NSC survival, migration, differentiation, and effect on neuroinflammation. Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria. NSC administration decreased infarct size (SMD 1.09; CI: 0.44, 1.74, P =.001; I[sup.2] = 74%) improved motor function measured via the impaired forelimb preference test (SMD 2.27; CI: 0.85, 3.69, P =.002; I[sup.2] = 86%) and the rotarod test (SMD 1.88; CI: 0.09, 3.67, P =.04; I[sup.2] = 95%). Additionally, NSCs improved cognitive function measured via the Morris water maze test (SMD of 2.41; CI: 1.16, 3.66, P =.0002; I[sup.2] = 81%). Preclinical evidence suggests that NSC therapy is promising for the treatment of perinatal brain injury. We have identified key knowledge gaps, including the lack of large animal studies and uncertainty regarding the necessity of immunosuppression for NSC transplantation in neonates. These knowledge gaps should be addressed before NSC treatment can effectively progress to clinical trial.
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Subject
