Evidence mapPaperPMID 19002124Full record

Trial reportNature clinical practice. Cardiovascular medicine2009

Combined delivery approach of bone marrow mononuclear stem cells early and late after myocardial infarction: the MYSTAR prospective, randomized study.

Mariann Gyöngyösi, Irene Lang, Markus Dettke, Gilbert Beran, Senta Graf, Heinz Sochor, Noémi Nyolczas, Silvia Charwat, Rayyan Hemetsberger, Günter Christ and 17 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nature clinical practice. Cardiovascular medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Stem cell treatment for acute myocardial infarction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Stem cells therapy in acute myocardial infarction: a new era?Clinical and experimental medicine · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. The role of stem cells in treating coronary artery disease in 2018.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Cell Therapies in Cardiomyopathy: Current Status of Clinical Trials.Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam) · 2017
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

27 authors.

Mariann GyöngyösiDepartment of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. mariann.gyongyosi@meduniwien.ac.at
Irene Lang
Markus Dettke
Gilbert Beran
Senta Graf
Heinz Sochor
Noémi Nyolczas
Silvia Charwat
Rayyan Hemetsberger
Günter Christ
István Edes
László Balogh
Korff Thomas Krause
Kai Jaquet
Karl-Heinz Kuck
Imre Benedek
Theodora Hintea
Róbert Kiss
István Préda
Vladimir Kotevski
Hristo Pejkov
Sholeh Zamini
Aliasghar Khorsand
Gottfried Sodeck
Alexandra Kaider
Gerald Maurer
Dietmar Glogar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCombined intracoronary and intramyocardial administration might improve outcomes for bone-marrow-derived stem cell therapy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We compared the safety and feasibility of early and late delivery of stem cells with combined therapy approaches.

methodsPatients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 45% after AMI were randomly assigned stem cell delivery via intramyocardial injection and intracoronary infusion 3-6 weeks or 3-4 months after AMI. Primary end points were changes in infarct size and left ventricular ejection fraction 3 months after therapy.

resultsA total of 60 patients were treated. The mean changes in infarct size at 3 months were -3.5 +/- 5.1% (95% CI -5.5% to -1.5%, P = 0.001) in the early group and -3.9 +/- 5.6% (95% CI -6.1% to -1.6%, P = 0.002) in the late group, and changes in ejection fraction were 3.5 +/- 5.6% (95% CI 1.3-5.6%, P = 0.003) and 3.4 +/- 7.0% (95% CI 0.7-6.1%, P = 0.017), respectively. At 9-12 months after AMI, ejection fraction remained significantly higher than at baseline in both groups. In the early and late groups, a mean of 200.3 +/- 68.7 x 10(6) and 194.8 +/- 60.4 x 10(6) stem cells, respectively, were delivered to the myocardium, and 1.30 +/- 0.68 x 10(9) and 1.29 +/- 0.41 x 10(9) cells, respectively, were delivered into the artery. A high number of cells was required for significant improvements in the primary end points.

conclusionsCombined cardiac stem cell delivery induces a moderate but significant improvement in myocardial infarct size and left ventricular function.

Indexed as

Bone Marrow TransplantationStem Cell TransplantationStroke VolumeVentricular Function, LeftAdultAgedEuropeFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionMyocardiumProspective StudiesSingle-Blind Method

Identifiers

PMID19002124

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.