Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Stem Cells. Aug 26, 2026; 18(8): 121648
Published online Aug 26, 2026. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.121648
Published online Aug 26, 2026. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.121648
Table 1 Summary of key clinical studies evaluating mesenchymal stem cell therapy in Crohn’s disease
| Ref. | Country | n (control vs MSC) | Autologous/allogeneic | Cell type/product | Follow-up | Main outcomes |
| Molendijk et al[48], 2015 | Netherlands | 6 vs 15 | Allogeneic | BM-MSC | 24 weeks | Fistula healing 40% vs 0%; good safety |
| Panés et al[42], 2016 | Europe/Israel | 107 vs 105 | Allogeneic | AD-MSC (Cx601, darvadstrocel) | 24 weeks | Combined remission 50% vs 34%; similar safety |
| Panés et al[6], 2018 | Europe/Israel | 103 vs 102 | Allogeneic | AD-MSC (Cx601) | 52 weeks | Sustained remission 56% vs 36% |
| Zhou et al[49], 2020 | China | 11 vs 11 | Autologous | AD-MSC | 52 weeks | Healing 63.6%; CDAI & PDAI improved; safe |
| Garcia-Olmo et al[50], 2022 | Europe/Israel | 15 vs 25 | Allogeneic | AD-MSC (Cx601) | 104 weeks | Sustained closure approximately 65%; no long-term safety issues |
| Lightner et al[51], 2023 | United States | 2-4 vs 4-15 | Allogeneic | BM-MSC/Remestemcel-L | 6 weeks to 3 months | Fistula healing; CDAI & CRP improvement; acceptable safety |
| Lindsay et al[52], 2017 | United Kingdom | 9 vs 13 | Autologous | HSC | 48 weeks | CDAI, SES-CD, IBDQ, MARIA, PRO2 improved; reversible AEs |
Table 2 Comparative studies of mesenchymal stem cell sheets and cell suspensions across different disease models
| Ref. | Model | MSC source | Comparison | Outcome type | Main outcome |
| Gao et al[62], 2022 | Porcine myocardial infarction | hUC-MSC | Cell sheet vs suspension | Functional recovery | Cell sheets improved cardiac function and reduced infarct size more effectively than MSC suspension |
| Takemura et al[66], 2020 | Rat diabetic nephropathy | AD-MSC | Cell sheet vs IV suspension | Anti-inflammatory/anti-fibrotic | Cell sheets showed greater attenuation of renal inflammation and fibrosis than suspended MSCs |
| Imafuku et al[65], 2019 | Rat renal ischemia-reperfusion injury | BM-MSC | Cell sheet vs IV suspension | Anti-fibrotic | Cell sheets more effectively reduced renal fibrosis and preserved microvasculature than MSC suspension |
| Chen et al[63], 2017 | Mouse skin wound/subcutaneous implantation | AD-MSC | Cell sheet vs suspension | Retention/paracrine activity | Cell sheets exhibited higher cell retention and stronger paracrine factor secretion than suspended MSCs |
| Long et al[64], 2014 | Mouse critical-sized femoral defect | BM-MSC | Cell sheet vs suspension | Structural regeneration | Cell sheets promoted superior bone regeneration and graft integration compared with MSC suspension |
| Qi et al[67], 2014 | Rabbit cartilage/meniscal defect | BM-MSC | Cell sheet vs suspension | Cartilage repair | Cell sheets achieved better matrix deposition and defect repair than injected MSCs |
Table 3 Comparison between mesenchymal stem cell therapy and myoblast cell sheet therapy
| Item | MSC therapy | Myoblast cell sheet therapy |
| Main effect | Immunomodulation and improvement of the local inflammatory environment | Local repair with potential muscle layer reconstruction |
| Delivery | Usually local injection; cells may be easily lost | Transplanted as a cell sheet, with better local retention |
| Repair pattern | Regulatory repair | Potential structural support and repair |
| Evidence in CD | Supported by several clinical studies | Direct evidence remains limited |
| Potential role | Promotes fistula closure and inflammation control | May support tissue reconstruction in complex fistulas |
- Citation: Zhang BL, Kobayashi S, Li LY, Li TY, Ogawa S, Miyamoto D, Hasegawa K, Yamaguchi S, Adachi T, Eguchi S, Kanetaka K. From mesenchymal stem cells to myoblast cell sheets: A next-generation regenerative concept for fistulizing Crohn’s disease. World J Stem Cells 2026; 18(8): 121648
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-0210/full/v18/i8/121648.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4252/wjsc.121648