No announcement yet.

Grafting of human bone marrow stromal cells into spinal cord injury

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Grafting of human bone marrow stromal cells into spinal cord injury

    Spine. 2009 Feb 15;34(4):328-34.

    Grafting of human bone marrow stromal cells into spinal cord injury: a comparison of delivery methods.

    Paul C, Samdani AF, Betz RR, Fischer I, Neuhuber B.

    Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19129, USA.

    STUDY DESIGN: Three groups of 6 rats received subtotal cervical spinal cord hemisections followed with marrow stromal cell (MSC) transplants by lumbar puncture (LP), intravenous delivery (IV), or direct injection into the injury (control). Animals survived for 4 or 21 days. OBJECTIVE: Cell therapy is a promising strategy for the treatment of spinal cord injury (SCI). The mode of cell delivery is crucial for the translation to the clinic. Injections directly into the parenchyma may further damage already compromised tissue; therefore, less invasive methods like LP or IV delivery are preferable. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Human MSC are multipotent mesenchymal adult stem cells that have a potential for autologous transplantation, obviating the need for immune suppression. Although previous studies have established that MSC can be delivered to the injured spinal cord by both LP and IV, the efficacy of cell delivery has not been directly compared with respect to efficacy of delivery and effects on the host. METHODS: Purified MSC from a human donor were transplanted into the CSF at the lumbar region (LP), into the femoral vein (IV), or directly into the injury (control). After sacrifice, spinal cord sections were analyzed for MSC graft size, tissue sparing, host immune response, and glial scar formation, using specific antibodies and Nissl-myelin staining. RESULTS: LP delivery of MSC to the injured spinal cord is superior to IV delivery. Cell engraftment and tissue sparing were significantly better after LP delivery, and host immune response after LP delivery was reduced compared with IV delivery. CONCLUSION: LP is an ideal minimally invasive technique to deliver cellular transplants to the injured spinal cord. It is superior to IV delivery and, together with the potential for autologous transplantation, lends itself for clinical application.
    “As the cast of villains in SCI is vast and collaborative, so too must be the chorus of hero's that rise to meet them” Ramer et al 2005