Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21082891›Full record

ReviewRegenerative medicine2010

Skeletal myoblasts for cardiac repair.

Shazia Durrani, Mikhail Konoplyannikov, Muhammad Ashraf, Khawaja Husnain Haider

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Regenerative medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Utilization of Stem Cells in Medicine: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Cardiac Progenitor Cells.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Shazia DurraniDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 231 Albert Sabin Way, University of Cincinnati, OH 45267-0529, USA.
Mikhail Konoplyannikov
Muhammad Ashraf
Khawaja Husnain Haider

Funding

Stem Cells in Cardiac Repair and AngiogenesisR37HL074272 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI ASHRAF, MUHAMMAD · 2003 to 2013
$5.7M
Cardiac Repair Using Smart Stem CellsR01HL087246 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI ASHRAF, MUHAMMAD · 2007 to 2011
$2.8M
Mechanistic basis of myoblast therapy &angiomyogenesisR01HL080686 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI ASHRAF, MUHAMMAD · 2005 to 2009
$2.7M
Preconditioning and re-programming of stem cells for cardiac repairR01HL087288 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI HABEEBAHMED, RAFEEQ, HAIDER, KHAWAJA H · 2008 to 2012
$1.9M
Simltaneous recruitment of cardiac and bone marrow stem cells for cardiac repairR01HL089535 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI HAIDER, KHAWAJA H · 2008 to 2012
$1.9M
NHLBI NIH HHS HL-080686NHLBI NIH HHS HL-087246NHLBI NIH HHS HL-087288NHLBI NIH HHS HL-089535NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL080686NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL087246NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL087288NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL089535NHLBI NIH HHS R37 HL074272NHLBI NIH HHS R37-HL074272
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stem cells provide an alternative curative intervention for the infarcted heart by compensating for the cardiomyocyte loss subsequent to myocardial injury. The presence of resident stem and progenitor cell populations in the heart, and nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells with genetic induction of pluripotency markers are the emerging new developments in stem cell-based regenerative medicine. However, until safety and feasibility of these cells are established by extensive experimentation in in vitro and in vivo experimental models, skeletal muscle-derived myoblasts, and bone marrow cells remain the most well-studied donor cell types for myocardial regeneration and repair. This article provides a critical review of skeletal myoblasts as donor cells for transplantation in the light of published experimental and clinical data, and indepth discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of skeletal myoblast-based therapeutic intervention for augmentation of myocardial function in the infarcted heart. Furthermore, strategies to overcome the problems of arrhythmogenicity and failure of the transplanted skeletal myoblasts to integrate with the host cardiomyocytes are discussed.

Indexed as

Wound HealingAnimalsClinical Trials as TopicHumansMyoblasts, SkeletalMyocardiumRegenerationStem Cell Transplantation

Identifiers

PMID21082891
PMCPMC3074361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.