4.6 Review

Spinal Cord Repair: From Cells and Tissue Engineering to Extracellular Vesicles

Journal

CELLS
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells10081872

Keywords

spinal cord injury; extracellular vesicles; exosomes; tissue engineering; scaffolds; cells; functional recovery

Categories

Funding

  1. 2020 Li Ka Shing Foundation Cross-Disciplinary Research Grant [2020LKSFG02C]
  2. Israel Foundation for Spinal Cord Injury

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Spinal cord injury is a devastating condition that affects motor, sensory, and autonomic nervous functions. Regenerative medicine aims to promote spinal cord tissue regeneration and functional recovery, but the complex pathophysiology of the condition presents challenges for effective treatments. Cell-based approaches, such as cell transplantation and extracellular vesicles therapy, show promise in preclinical research and clinical trials for spinal cord injury.
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a debilitating condition, often leading to severe motor, sensory, or autonomic nervous dysfunction. As the holy grail of regenerative medicine, promoting spinal cord tissue regeneration and functional recovery are the fundamental goals. Yet, effective regeneration of injured spinal cord tissues and promotion of functional recovery remain unmet clinical challenges, largely due to the complex pathophysiology of the condition. The transplantation of various cells, either alone or in combination with three-dimensional matrices, has been intensively investigated in preclinical SCI models and clinical trials, holding translational promise. More recently, a new paradigm shift has emerged from cell therapy towards extracellular vesicles as an exciting cell-free therapeutic modality. The current review recapitulates recent advances, challenges, and future perspectives of cell-based spinal cord tissue engineering and regeneration strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available