ReviewActa Cardiologica Sinica2018
Heart Regeneration in Adult Mammals after Myocardial Damage.
Review in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting efferocytosis for tissue regeneration: From microenvironment reprogramming to clinical translation.Theranostics · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Potential of Gasdermin D-Mediated Myocardial Pyroptosis in Ischaemic Heart Disease: Expanding the Paradigm From Bench to Clinical Insights.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Ischemic cardiac stromal fibroblast-derived protein mediators in the infarcted myocardium and transcriptomic profiling at single cell resolution.Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Article
- Circulating microRNAs and cardiomyocyte proliferation in heart failure patients related to 10 years survival.ESC heart failure · 2023Article
- Article
- Targeting Epigenetic Regulation of Cardiomyocytes through Development for Therapeutic Cardiac Regeneration after Heart Failure.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Zebrafish Fin: Complex Molecular Interactions and Cellular Mechanisms Guiding Regeneration.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2022Review
- Some Insights into the Regulation of Cardiac Physiology and Pathology by the Hippo Pathway.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Cardiac Telocytes 16 Years on-What Have We Learned So Far, and How Close Are We to Routine Application of the Knowledge in Cardiovascular Regenerative Medicine?International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- A Genetic Cardiomyocyte Ablation Model for the Study of Heart Regeneration in Zebrafish.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Bioresorbable Polymeric Scaffold in Cardiovascular Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Elucidating the Surface Functionality of Biomimetic RGD Peptides Immobilized on Nano-P(3HB-Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Protective Roles and Mechanisms of Taurine on Myocardial Hypoxia/Reoxygenation-Induced Apoptosis.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart regeneration remains a critical question in current basic research and clinical practice. The adult mammalian heart exhibits a very limited regeneration capacity. In contrast, adult zebrafish and neonatal mice retain a remarkable ability of heart regeneration after damage. Understanding the mechanisms of heart regeneration would be very valuable to help design efficient treatment strategies against myocardial damage and heart failure. While inherent regeneration of the heart occurs after damage with varying efficiency among species, regeneration may also be induced exogenously. In this study, we briefly review the different approaches and current progress in improving heart 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.