Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2019.
World J Stem Cells. Oct 26, 2019; 11(10): 891-903
Published online Oct 26, 2019. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v11.i10.891
Table 3 Raw motor outcome data
Ref.Follow-up assessments after intervention (mo)Change in GMFM-88/66 after 6 mo ± SDChange in GMFM-88/66 after 12 mo ± SD% improvement compared to baseline after whole observation period
Chen et al[45], 20131, 3, 6Numbers inaccurately indicated--
Huang et al[46], 20183, 6, 12, 24Control: + 2.96 ± 1.66; MSC: + 7.62 ± 2.44Control: + 4.75 ± 1.45; MSC: + 10.27 ± 2.96Control: 5.67%; UCB: 14.89%
Kang et al[47], 20151, 3, 6Control: 3.85 ± 3.75; UCB: 7.08 ± 7.36Control: 13.1%; UCB: 24.2%
Liu et al[40], 20173,6, 12Control: + 1.85; BMMNC: + 3.1; BMMSC: + 10.45Control: + 2.91; BMMNC: + 6.46; BMMSC: + 12.52Control: 7.84%; BMMSC: 33.76%
Luan et al[44], 20121, 6, 12Control: not indicated; NPC: + 8.86--
Min et al[39], 20131, 3, 6Control: + 7.8 ± 5.1; EPO only: + 9.0 ± 6,3; UCB + EPO: + 9.1 ± 6.7-No baseline score provided
Rah et al[42], 201712 mo after treatment resp. 6 mo for crossover-group-Transplantation at baseline: + 2.9; Transplantation after 6 mo: + 6.37No baseline score provided
Sun et al[41], 201712, 24-Control: + 6.9 ± 5.5; UCB: + 7.5 ± 6.8 (High dose: improvement + 4.3 ± 1.5 greater than expected. Low-dose and placebo: no significant improvement beyond expectation.)Control: 13.3%; UCB: 15.3%