ReviewClinical cardiology2015
Stem-cell angiogenesis and regeneration of the heart: review of a saga of 2 decades.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stem cell-based regenerative therapies for non-ischemic cardiomyopathy: mechanistic insights, clinical evidence, and future directions.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Pro-Angiogenic Actions of CMC-Derived Extracellular Vesicles Rely on Selective Packaging of Angiopoietin 1 and 2, but Not FGF-2 and VEGF.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2019Article
- Developments in the management of Chagas cardiomyopathy.Expert review of cardiovascular therapy · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in the novel approach to control ischemic heart disease and heart failure using stem cells or progenitor cells from bone marrow, mesenchyme, or myocardial tissue itself have demonstrated efficacy for increasing left ventricular function, decreasing infarct scar tissue, improving exercise tolerance and heart failure symptoms, and, in some studies, decreasing mortality and reducing rehospitalization for intractable angina or subsequent myocardial infarction. The most common techniques utilize injections of cells into the coronary vasculature or directly into specific areas of vulnerable myocardium. Although few adverse effects have been noted in clinical trials of these procedures, further clinical trials over the next decade should provide further advances in interventional techniques, ancillary supporting technologies to enhance cell regeneration, and applications in ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathies, and cardiac genetic disorders.
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.