Resumen

Background: Differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells into Schwann cell precursors could reverse established lesions and sequelae of medullary transection. Objective: The objective of this study was to study the clinical response of mesenchymal stem cell transplantation with Schwann precursor cell transplantation in a rat spinal cord injury model, using motor function and histopathologic studies. Materials and Methods: A total of 28 Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided among four groups (n = 7 in each): sham group, control group, mesenchymal stem cell transplant group, and Schwann cell precursor transplant group. The surgical procedure was a laminectomy with transection of the spinal cord at the T11 level in the transplant groups and the injury control group. After 1 week, the transplant groups received stem cells directly in the injury site. Hind limb motor function was assessed using the locomotive scale of Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan. 1 month after transplantation, all specimens were sacrificed to make a histopathologic description of sections taken from the site of injury and where stem cells were transplanted. Mean scores of mobility were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA) of one factor with 95% reliability between groups and ANOVA of repetitive measures to evaluate evolution in the same group. Results: We observed that the control group had statistically greater mobility than the other groups (p < 0.0001) and that the group with spinal injury without treatment had the lowest mean mobility. The mobility score values from the Schwann cell precursor group were statistically higher than the group treated with mesenchymal stem cells (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Schwann precursor cells had a greater effect on locomotive function than mesenchymal stem cells.

Palabras clave: Stem cell transplantation schwann cells spinal cord injury cell therapy spinal cord transection.

2018-08-20   |   303 visitas   |   Evalua este artículo 0 valoraciones

Vol. 70 Núm.2. Marzo-Abril 2018 Pags. 88-95 Rev Invest Clin 2018; 70(2)