Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25074230›Full record

ArticleDevelopmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists2014

Regenerative responses after mild heart injuries for cardiomyocyte proliferation in zebrafish.

Junji Itou, Ryutaro Akiyama, Steve Pehoski, Xiaodan Yu, Hiroko Kawakami, Yasuhiko Kawakami

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Zebrafish heart regenerates after chemoptogenetic cardiomyocyte depletion.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Reactive oxygen species during heart regeneration in zebrafish: Lessons for future clinical therapies.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2021
    Review
  7. Cauterization as a Simple Method for Regeneration Studies in the Zebrafish Heart.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2020
    Article
  8. Zebrafish heart regeneration: 15 years of discoveries.Regeneration (Oxford, England) · 2017
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Cell migration during heart regeneration in zebrafish.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2016
    Review
  11. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Junji ItouDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Stem Cell Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Ryutaro Akiyama
Steve Pehoski
Xiaodan Yu
Hiroko Kawakami
Yasuhiko Kawakami
University of Minnesota · US

Funding

Genetic Regulation of Progenitor Cells in Appendicular Skeletal DevelopmentR01AR064195 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI KAWAKAMI, YASUHIKO · 2013 to 2022
$3.3M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR064195NIAMS NIH HHS R01AR064195
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe zebrafish heart regenerates after various severe injuries. Common processes of heart regeneration are cardiomyocyte proliferation, activation of epicardial tissue, and neovascularization. In order to further characterize heart regeneration processes, we introduced milder injuries and compared responses to those induced by ventricular apex resection, a widely used injury method. We used scratching of the ventricular surface and puncturing of the ventricle with a fine tungsten needle as injury-inducing techniques.

resultsScratching the ventricular surface induced subtle cardiomyocyte proliferation and responses of the epicardium. Endothelial cell accumulation was limited to the surface of the heart. Ventricular puncture induced cardiomyocyte proliferation, endocardial and epicardial activation, and neo-vascularization, similar to the resection method. However, the degree of the responses was milder, correlating with milder injury. Sham operation induced epicardial aldh1a2 expression but not tbx18 and WT1.

conclusionsPuncturing the ventricle induces responses equivalent to resection at milder degrees in a shorter time frame and can be used as a simple injury model. Scratching the ventricle did not induce heart regeneration and can be used for studying wound responses to epicardium.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell ProliferationEndothelial CellsHeart InjuriesHeart VentriclesHistological TechniquesImage Processing, Computer-AssistedIn Situ HybridizationMyocytes, CardiacRegenerationRetinal DehydrogenaseT-Box Domain ProteinsWound HealingWT1 ProteinsZebrafishZebrafish ProteinsRetinal DehydrogenaseT-Box Domain Proteinstbx18 protein, zebrafishWT1 ProteinsZebrafish Proteinscardiomyocytesendothelial cellsepicardial cellsheartregenerationzebrafish

Identifiers

PMID25074230
PMCPMC4206598
OpenAlexW2159905336

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.