ReviewInterventional medicine & applied science2016
Effects of amniotic epithelial cell transplantation in endothelial injury.
Review in Interventional medicine & applied science, 2016. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characteristics and Therapeutic Potential of Human Amnion-Derived Stem Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Common Injuries and Repair Mechanisms in the Endothelial Lining.Chinese medical journal · 2018Review
- Evidence of Amniotic Epithelial Cell Differentiation toward Hepatic Sinusoidal Endothelial Cells.Cell transplantation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHuman amniotic epithelial cells (hAECs) are promising tools for endothelial repair in vascular regenerative medicine. We hypothesized that these epithelial cells are capable of repairing the damaged endothelial layer following balloon injury of the carotid artery in adult male rats.
resultsTwo days after injury, the transplanted hAECs were observed at the luminal side of the arterial wall. Then, 4 weeks after the injury, significant intimal thickening was observed in both untreated and cell implanted vessels. Constriction was decreased in both implanted and control animals. Immunohistochemical analysis showed a few surviving cells in the intact arterial wall, but no cells were observed at the site of injury. Interestingly, acetylcholine-induced dilation was preserved in the intact side and the sham-transplanted injured arteries, but it was a trend toward decreased vasodilation in the hAECs' transplanted vessels.
conclusionWe conclude that hAECs were able to incorporate into the arterial wall without immunosuppression, but failed to improve vascular function, highlighting that morphological implantation does not necessarily result in functional benefits and underscoring the need to understand other mechanisms of endothelial regeneration.
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.