Using stem cells as a treatment for spinal cord paralysis has been attempted before (using Mesenchymal stem cells) but with little success for patients with a completely severed spinal cord (only outcome from these procedures is that some patients regain sensation in leg muscles, but no movement as such). Patients with a partially severed spinal cord tend to do somewhat better with a stem cell transplant (but are normally also at least slightly functional to begin with ie. before the intervention). The problem with using stem cells for repairing the spinal cord is that scar tissue develops after an injury to the spine (which prevents the nerves from re-connecting). As far as I can tell, the innovative difference with this new procedure described in the first post, above, is that they used grafting to allow nerves to regrow. I am unsure why they specifically used OEC stem cells - I don't believe that would be the "critical" difference. I will be having a phone call next week with the first stem cell clinic I was treated at - and I will ask them about it.
As for a direct "application" towards restoring hair cells, my take is that there is none what-so-ever. Restoring cochlear hair cells requires the need to regrow a structure from scratch - which is different to repairing an existing structure. But then again, there isn't necessarily a need to regrow completely new cochlear hair cells in order to improve hearing; repairing existing damaged hair cells will in itself be beneficial.
Member
