ReviewHerz2018
[Stem cell-based cardiac regeneration after myocardial infarction].
Review in Herz, 2018. 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.
- Human umbilical vein endothelial cells-derived exosomes enhance cardiac function after acute myocardial infarction by activating the PI3K/AKT signaling pathway.Bioengineered · 2022Article
- Effect of neuron-derived neurotrophic factor on rejuvenation of human adipose-derived stem cells for cardiac repair after myocardial infarction.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2019Article
- Apoptosis of bone marrow mesenchymal stromal/stem cells via the MAPK and endoplasmic reticulum stress signaling pathways.American journal of translational research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myocardial infarction leads to an irreversible loss of vital myocardial cells. The transplantation of new cardiomyocytes into the heart was first described over 20 years ago and represents a straightforward approach to remuscularize a damaged heart. Due to the lack of human cells a clinical application seemed ambitious; however, dramatic progress in stem cell biology over the last two decades has paved the way towards a clinical application. This is especially important as the prognosis for patients with terminal heart failure is still poor. The transplantation of either cardiomyocytes or engineered heart tissue derived from pluripotent stem cells (either embryonic stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells) might represent a new regenerative approach. Transplantation of either cells or tissue constructs has now been evaluated in several preclinical models, which have demonstrated that an injured heart can be (partially) remuscularized; however, major hurdles towards a clinical application are the transplantation-related occurrence of arrhythmia, the potential tumorigenicity of pluripotent cells and the required immunosuppression. Several groups are working hard to solve these problems and we are optimistic that the first clinical studies will take place within the next few years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29243046What 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.