A Case Study Stem Cell Therapy to Support Complex Degenerative Spine Disease Before and After Surgery

A Case Study: Stem Cell Therapy to Support Complex Degenerative Spine Disease Before and After Surgery

Case Overview

This case involves a male patient aged approximately 60–61 years with a long history of complex thoracic and lumbar spine problems. He had previously undergone several spinal surgeries, including fusion at T9–T11 and L5–S1, but continued to experience chronic back pain that significantly affected his sleep, work, mobility, and overall quality of life.

The patient enjoyed outdoor activities such as surfing, skiing, and snowboarding. He therefore wished to preserve his mobility and remain as physically active as possible. He contacted Vega Clinic to explore stem cell therapy as part of an integrated care plan for degenerative spinal disease, inflammation, and chronic pain.

His care was divided into three main stages:

• UC-MSC therapy and supportive care in April 2025

• Lumbar decompression and fusion surgery in November 2025

• Postoperative UC-MSC therapy to support recovery in February 2026

1. Symptom Background and Previous Treatment History

The patient reported chronic spinal pain for many years. The severity of his symptoms affected his sleep, ability to work, daily activities, and personal life.

He had been using prescription pain medication for approximately 20 years, including OxyContin and Percocet. One of his goals was to reduce his long-term dependence on pain medication under the supervision of the prescribing physician.

His relevant medical history included:

• Thoracic spinal fusion

• Lumbar spinal fusion a

• Multilevel degenerative disc disease

• Facet-joint arthropathy

• Neural-foraminal narrowing

• Bulging and protruding discs

• Radiating nerve pain

• Nerve-root compression

• Bilateral foot drop

• Long-term opioid pain-medication use

2. Medical Reports

Imaging Findings from December 2024

Thoracolumbar X-rays showed previous spinal instrumentation and fusion. The hardware remained appropriately positioned, with no obvious evidence of complication.

However, the imaging also demonstrated multilevel degenerative disc disease, including moderate degeneration and mild rightward curvature of the lumbar spine.

A lumbar MRI performed on December 2024 identified abnormalities at several levels:

• Facet arthropathy with mild bilateral neural-foraminal narrowing

• A disc bulge measuring approximately 2 mm, together with ligament thickening, facet arthropathy, and mild neural-foraminal narrowing

• A central disc protrusion with an annular fissure measuring approximately 4 mm

• Moderate bilateral neural-foraminal narrowing

• Contact with both L4 nerve roots

• Mild backward displacement of the vertebrae from L3 to L5

These findings indicated that the patient’s symptoms were not caused by a single abnormality. They were associated with a combination of disc degeneration, facet-joint disease, narrowing around the nerves, and changes adjacent to the previously fused spinal levels.

Thoracic Spine MRI

A thoracic MRI performed in January 2025 showed postoperative changes at T9–T11 and mild degenerative changes at several disc levels.

The thoracic spinal cord appeared normal, with no significant spinal-canal or neural-foraminal narrowing.

Surgery in November 2025

The patient later developed worsening neurological and structural problems, including:

• Persistent L5 nerve-root compression

• Bilateral foot drop

• Lateral recess stenosis

• Lumbar radiculopathy

• Spinal deformity

• Severe pain requiring long-term pain medication

He therefore underwent surgery on November 2025. The procedure included nerve decompression, spinal instrumentation, and fusion at L3–L5, together with additional procedures involving L3–L4, L4–L5, and L5–S1 as clinically appropriate.

During surgery, severe narrowing was found on the left side at L4–L5, with significant compression of the L5 nerve root.

Postoperative Imaging

A postoperative MRI performed in January 2026 showed spinal instrumentation and fusion at L3–L5, as well as the previous fusion at L5–S1.

No central spinal-canal stenosis was identified. However, some of the neural foramina could not be evaluated clearly because of artefact from the metallic implants.

The MRI also showed a postoperative subcutaneous haematoma above the fascia, This finding required assessment before any additional procedure was considered.

Figure 1: Composite lumbar imaging figure demonstrating the patient’s preoperative and postoperative findings. The preoperative lumbar MRI shows an L4–L5 disc protrusion with annular fissuring and associated neural foraminal narrowing. The postoperative images demonstrate spinal instrumentation and fusion, while the postoperative lumbar CT further shows the position of the spinal implants in relation to the surrounding bony structures.

Any identifying details, including the patient’s name, date of birth, medical-record number, and healthcare-provider information, should be removed before the images are published.

The Patient’s Condition and the Role of Stem Cell Therapy

This was a complex degenerative spinal condition because the patient had disc degeneration, nerve-root compression, previous multilevel fusion surgery, and neurological symptoms.

Stem cell therapy cannot physically widen the spaces around compressed nerves, correct spinal deformity, reposition implanted hardware, or replace surgery when severe structural nerve compression is present.

Its potential role in selected cases is supportive and may include:

• Helping regulate inflammatory activity

• Supporting communication between cells

• Supporting the condition of surrounding tissues

• Promoting a biological environment favourable to recovery

• Supporting comfort and mobility

• Complementing rehabilitation and physiotherapy

Stem cell therapy should not be described as rebuilding an entire disc, reversing spinal fusion, or guaranteeing the recovery of chronically damaged nerves.

3. Treatment

The patient received care in several stages, combining UC-MSC therapy, surgery, and supportive treatment according to medical assessment.

Initial Treatment Course

In April 2025, the patient underwent a medical assessment and blood testing before starting the programme. He then received UC-MSCs through targeted injections around the lumbar and thoracic spine, as well as intravenous administration. Supportive treatments included NAD+ and intravenous vitamins.

The treatment schedule listed approximately 190 million cells in total. However, the final administration records should be reviewed because some entries in the schedule may have related to the patient’s companion.

Spinal Surgery

As the patient’s nerve compression and neurological symptoms became more severe, he underwent decompression and fusion surgery in November 2025.

The purpose of surgery was to address the structural abnormalities and relieve nerve-root compression. These mechanical problems could not be corrected by stem cell therapy alone.

Postoperative Treatment

In February 2026, the patient returned for a postoperative recovery-support programme.

The programme included intravenous UC-MSC therapy, targeted injections around the facet joints and nerves with PRP, and other supportive therapies prescribed by the medical team.

Based on the entries clearly attributed to the patient, the February programme included approximately 150 million UC-MSCs.

The purpose of the postoperative programme was to support the tissues surrounding the spine and the overall recovery process. It was not intended to reverse the surgery, alter the position of the hardware, or guarantee neurological recovery.

Summary of the Care Timeline

4. Patient-Reported Outcomes and Feedback

The available records confirm that the patient completed stem cell programmes both before and after surgery. However, they do not yet include structured follow-up data concerning pain levels, mobility, neurological function, or changes in medication use.

It would therefore be premature to conclude that the treatment:

• Reduced the patient’s pain

• Improved his foot drop

• Restored nerve function

• Reduced his use of pain medication

• Allowed him to return to sport or exercise

• Reduced the need for further surgery

These outcomes should be included only after they have been confirmed through patient follow-up and medical evaluation.

Information Recommended for Further Follow-up

• Pain levels before and after treatment

• Walking and standing tolerance

• Numbness, radiating pain, or weakness

• Foot and ankle muscle strength

• Sleep quality

• Ability to work and perform daily activities

• Changes in pain-medication use

• Progress during physiotherapy

• Complications or adverse effects

• Follow-up findings at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months

Doctor’s Perspective

This case demonstrates the difference between treatment intended to support the biological environment and treatment intended to correct structural spinal problems.

The stem cell treatment provided in April 2025 was intended to support the surrounding tissues and help regulate factors associated with inflammation. However, when the patient developed more severe nerve-root compression, foot drop, and progressive stenosis, surgery remained necessary.

The postoperative treatment in February 2026 therefore served as complementary support for recovery. It was not intended to correct structural abnormalities or replace the effects of surgery.

Key Clinical Considerations

• Physical nerve compression requires assessment by a spinal specialist.

• Stem cell therapy cannot directly decompress a compressed nerve.

• Postoperative treatment should be considered only after evaluating wound healing, infection risk, and updated imaging.

• The postoperative haematoma should be assessed before additional procedures.

• Longstanding foot drop may be associated with chronic nerve damage.

• Outcomes should be assessed over time rather than based only on an early response.

• Reduction or discontinuation of opioid medication must be supervised by the prescribing physician.

Conclusion

This case involves a patient with complex degenerative spinal disease, a history of multilevel fusion surgery, chronic pain, long-term pain-medication use, and nerve-root compression affecting mobility.

The patient first received UC-MSC therapy and supportive care in April 2025. When his structural and neurological problems became more severe, he underwent decompression and fusion surgery at L3–L5 in November 2025.

Following surgery, he completed another UC-MSC programme in February 2026. This programme combined targeted injections, intravenous administration, PRP, and other supportive therapies intended to support the surrounding tissues and the overall recovery process.

This case should be presented as an example of stem cell therapy being used as part of a multistage care plan. It should not be presented as a replacement for surgery or as a guarantee that damaged bone, discs, or nerves will regenerate.

Further follow-up information regarding pain, mobility, neurological function, medication use, and quality of life is needed to assess the longer-term outcome appropriately.