Search

Background: This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the mid- to long-term efficacy and safety of stem cell therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: The study encompassed 79 randomized controlled trials with 7103 patients, rendering it the most up-to-date and extensive analysis in this field. This study specifically focused on the impact of stem cell therapy on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and infarct size. Results: Stem cell therapy significantly improved LVEF at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months post-transplantation compared to control values, indicating its potential for long-term cardiac function enhancement. A trend toward reduced MACE occurrence was observed in the intervention groups, suggesting the potential of stem cell therapy to lower the risk of cardiovascular death, reinfarction, and stroke. Significant LVEF improvements were associated with long cell culture durations exceeding 1 week, particularly when combined with high injected cell quantities (at least 108 cells). No significant reduction in infarct size was observed. Conclusions: This review highlights the potential of stem cell therapy as a promising therapeutic approach for patients with AMI, offering sustained LVEF improvement and a potential reduction in MACE risk. However, further research is required to optimize cell culture techniques, determine the optimal timing and dosage, and investigate procedural variations to maximize the efficacy and safety of stem cell therapy in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effect of transplantation of bone-marrow mononuclear cells (BM-MNCs) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) on ejection fraction (LVEF) has been studied in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in clinical trials. This raises the question that which type of cell may help improve LVEF better in AMI patients. No meta-analysis of clinical trials has yet addressed this question. Methods: Electronic databases were searched thoroughly to find eligible trials on the effects of transplantation of BM-MNCs and MSCs in patients with AMI. The primary outcome was improvement in LVEF. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. For maximizing the credibility of subgroup analysis, we used the instrument for assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification of Analyses (ICEMAN) for meta-analyses. Results: A total of 36 trials (26 on BM-MNCs and 10 on MSCs) with 2489 patients (1466 were transplanted [1241 with BM-MNCs and 225 with MSCs] and 1023 as controls) were included. Both types of cells showed significant improvements in ejection fraction in short-term follow-up (BM-MNCs: WMD = 2.13%, 95% CI = 1.23 to 3.04, p < 0.001; MSCs: WMD = 3.71%, 95% CI = 2.32 to 5.09, p < 0.001), and according to ICEMAN criteria, MSCs are more effective. For selected population of patients who received stem cell transplantation in early course after AMI (less than 11 days), this effect was even more pronounced (BM-MNC: WMD = 3.07%, 95% CI = 1.97 to 4.17, p < 0.001, I2 = 40.7%; MSCs: WMD = 5.65%, 95% CI = 3.47 to 7.84, p < 0.001, I2 = 84.6%). Conclusion: Our results showed that transplantation of MSCs after AMI might increase LVEF more than BM-MNCs; also, based on ICEMAN, there was likely effect modification between subgroups although uncertainty still remained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important aspect of cell therapy in the field of cardiac disease is safe and effective delivery of cells. Commonly used delivery strategies such as intramyocardial injection and intracoronary infusion both present with advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, alternative delivery routes are explored, such as retrograde coronary venous infusion (RCVI). Our aim is to evaluate safety and efficiency of RCVI by providing a complete overview of preclinical and clinical studies applying RCVI in a broad range of disease types and experimental models. Available data on technical and safety aspects of RCVI are incomplete and insufficient. Improvement of cardiac function is seen after cell delivery via RCVI. However, cell retention in the heart after RCVI appears inferior compared to intracoronary infusion and intramyocardial injection. Adequately powered confirmatory studies on retention rates and safety are needed to proceed with RCVI in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bone marrow-derived cell therapy has been used to treat acute myocardial infarction. However, the therapeutic efficacy of this approach remains controversial. Here, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate short-term and long-term effectiveness of bone marrow-derived therapy. Methods: We searched eight databases (Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, Cochrane Library, KoreaMed, KMBASE, KISS, RISS, and KisTi) up to December 2014. Demographic characteristics, clinical outcomes, and adverse events were analyzed. We identified 5534 potentially relevant studies; 405 were subjected to a full-text review. Forty-three studies with 2635 patients were included in this review. Results: No safety issues related to cell injection were reported during follow-up. At 6 months, cell-injected patients showed modest improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) compared with the control group. However, there were no differences between groups at other time points. In the cardiac MRI analysis, there were no significant differences in infarct size reduction between groups. Interestingly, mortality tended to be reduced at the 3-year follow-up, and at the 5-year follow-up, cell injection significantly decreased all-cause mortality. Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated discrepancies between short-term LV functional improvement and long-term all-cause mortality. Future clinical trials should include long-term follow-up outcomes to validate the therapeutic efficacy of cell therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]