ReviewJournal of cellular physiology2020
Arrhythmogenic risks of stem cell replacement therapy for cardiovascular diseases.
Review in Journal of cellular physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stem Cells and Their Derivatives in Cardiac Fibrosis Therapy: Challenges and Perspectives.Cells · 2026Review
- FOXO1-NMNAT3 axis dysregulation promotes doxorubicin cardiotoxicity: NADRedox report : communications in free radical research · 2025Article
- To Repair a Broken Heart: Stem Cells in Ischemic Heart Disease.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Review
- Casein Kinase 1 Phosphomimetic Mutations Negatively Impact Connexin-43 Gap Junctions in Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes.Biomolecules · 2024Article
- Review
- Review
- Electrophysiologic Conservation of Epicardial Conduction Dynamics After Myocardial Infarction and Natural Heart Regeneration in Newborn Piglets.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Cell sheet formation enhances the therapeutic effects of human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells on myocardial infarction as a bioactive material.Bioactive materials · 2021Article
- Zebrafish cardiac regeneration-looking beyond cardiomyocytes to a complex microenvironment.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2020Review
- Regenerative and molecular therapies for myocardial repair (Review).Medicine internationalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Ischemic heart disease and congestive heart failure are major contributors to high morbidity and mortality. Approximately 1.5 million cases of myocardial infarction occur annually in the United States; the yearly incidence rate is approximately 600 cases per 100,000 people. Although significant progress to improve the survival rate has been made by medications and implantable medical devices, damaged cardiomyocytes are unable to be recovered by current treatment strategies. After almost two decades of research, stem cell therapy has become a very promising approach to generate new cardiomyocytes and enhance the function of the heart. Along with clinical trials with stem cells conducted in cardiac regeneration, concerns regarding safety and potential risks have emerged. One of the contentious issues is the electrical dysfunctions of cardiomyocytes and cardiac arrhythmia after stem cell therapy. In this review, we focus on the cell sources currently used for stem cell therapy and discuss related arrhythmogenic risk.
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.