ArticleBiomaterials2014
The use of gadolinium-carbon nanostructures to magnetically enhance stem cell retention for cellular cardiomyoplasty.
Article in Biomaterials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Comprehensive Review on Filled Carbon Nanotubes: Synthesis, Properties and Applications.Chemical reviews · 2026Review
- Micro/Nanosystems for Magnetic Targeted Delivery of Bioagents.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- A New High-Performance Gadonanotube-Polymer Hybrid Material for Stem Cell Labeling and Tracking by MRI.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2018Article
- PET-MR and SPECT-MR multimodality probes: Development and challenges.Theranostics · 2018Review
- Magnetic targeting as a strategy to enhance therapeutic effects of mesenchymal stromal cells.Stem cell research & therapy · 2017Review
- Nanoparticles-Assisted Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Heart Disease.Stem cells international · 2016Review
- Nanoparticles and clinically applicable cell tracking.The British journal of radiology · 2015Review
- Dragging human mesenchymal stem cells with the aid of supramolecular assemblies of single-walled carbon nanotubes, molecular magnets, and peptides in a magnetic field.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Hematopoietic and mesenchymal stem cells: polymeric nanoparticle uptake and lineage differentiation.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In this work, the effectiveness of using Gadonanotubes (GNTs) with an external magnetic field to improve retention of transplanted adult mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) during cellular cardiomyoplasty was evaluated. As a high-performance T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) cell tracking label, the GNTs are gadolinium-loaded carbon nanotube capsules that render MSCs magnetic when internalized. MSCs were internally labeled with either superparamagnetic GNTs or colloidal diamagnetic lutetium (Lu). In vitro cell rolling assays and ex vivo cardiac perfusion experiments qualitatively demonstrated increased magnetic-assisted retention of GNT-labeled MSCs. Subsequent in vivo epicardial cell injections were performed around a 1.3 T NdFeB ring magnet sutured onto the left ventricle of female juvenile pigs (n = 21). Cell dosage, magnet exposure time, and endpoints were varied to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the proposed therapy. Quantification of retained cells in collected tissues by elemental analysis (Gd or Lu) showed that the external magnet helped retain nearly three times more GNT-labeled MSCs than Lu-labeled cells. The sutured magnet was tolerated for up to 168 h; however, an inflammatory response to the magnet was noted after 48 h. These proof-of-concept studies support the feasibility and value of using GNTs as a magnetic nanoparticle facilitator to improve cell retention during cellular cardiomyoplasty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.