Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29569254›Full record

Trial reportClinical cardiology2018

Stem-cell therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with reduced ejection fraction: A multicenter, double-blind randomized trial.

José C Nicolau, Remo H M Furtado, Suzana A Silva, Carlos E Rochitte, Anis Rassi, João B M C Moraes, Edgard Quintella, Costantino R Costantini, Adrian P M Korman, Marco A Mattos and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Hybrid techniques for myocardial regeneration: state of the art and future perspectives.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2022
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Stem cells therapy in acute myocardial infarction: a new era?Clinical and experimental medicine · 2021
    Review
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

15 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

José C NicolauCoronary Care Unit, Instituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, HCFMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Remo H M FurtadoCoronary Care Unit, Instituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, HCFMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Suzana A SilvaClinical Research Unit, Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Carlos E RochitteCardiovascular Imaging Department, Instituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas, HCFMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Anis RassiDivision of Cardiology, Anis Rassi Hospital, Goiânia, Brazil.
João B M C MoraesCardiology Department, Hospital Agamenon Magalhaes, Recife, Brazil.
Edgard QuintellaCardiology Department, Instituto de Cardiologia Aloysio de Castro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Costantino R CostantiniDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Hospital Cardiológico Costantini, Curitiba, Brazil.
Adrian P M KormanCardiology Department, Sociedade Divina Providencia Hospital Santa Isabel, Blumenau, Brazil.
Marco A MattosClinical Research Unit, Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Hélio J CastelloCardiology Department, Hospital Bandeirantes, São Paulo, Brazil.
Adriano CaixetaDepartment of Interventional Cardiology, Instituto do Coração do Distrito Federal, Brasília, Brazil.
Hans F R DohmannCardiology Department, PROCEP/Amil Assistência Médica Internacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Antonio C C de CarvalhoClinical Research Unit, Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
MiHeart/AMI Investigators
Instituto Nacional de Cardiologia · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRHospital Bandeirantes · BRHospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BRHospital de Magalhães Lemos · PTInstituto de Cardiologia do Distrito Federal · BRInternational Institute for Sustainability · BRUniversidade Regional de Blumenau · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLeft ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a major determinant of long-term prognosis after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). STEMI patients with reduced LVEF have a poor prognosis, despite successful reperfusion and the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors. HYPOTHESIS: Intracoronary infusion of bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells (BMMC) may improve LVEF in STEMI patients successfully reperfused.

methodsThe main inclusion criteria for this double-blind, randomized, multicenter study were patient age 30 to 80 years, LVEF ≤50%, successful angioplasty of infarct-related artery, and regional dysfunction in the infarct-related area analyzed before cell injection. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was used to assess LVEF, left ventricular volumes, and infarct size at 7 to 9 days and 6 months post-myocardial infarction.

resultsOne hundred and twenty-one patients were included (66 patients in the BMMC group and 55 patients in the placebo group). The primary endpoint, mean LVEF, was similar between both groups at baseline (44.63% ± 10.74% vs 42.23% ± 10.33%; P = 0.21) and at 6 months (44.74% ± 12.95 % vs 43.50 ± 12.43%; P = 0.59). The groups were also similar regarding the difference between baseline and 6 months (0.11% ± 8.5% vs 1.27% ± 8.93%; P = 0.46). Other parameters of left ventricular remodeling, such as systolic and diastolic volumes, as well as infarct size, were also similar between groups.

conclusionsIn this randomized, multicenter, double-blind trial, BMMC intracoronary infusion did not improve left ventricular remodeling or decrease infarct size.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart VentriclesHumansMagnetic Resonance Imaging, CineMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesST Elevation Myocardial InfarctionStem Cell TransplantationStroke VolumeAcute Coronary SyndromeCardiomyopathyIschemic Heart DiseaseMyocardial InfarctionStem Cell Therapy

Identifiers

PMID29569254
PMCPMC6489870
OpenAlexW2792920533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.