CD34+ autologous human stem cells in treating refractory angina.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Sex-Based Differences in Autologous Cell Therapy Trials in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: Subanalysis of the ACCRUE Database.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021
   Article
2. The Clinical Status of Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.Stem cells international · 2015
   Review
3. Regenerative principles enrich cardiac rehabilitation practice.American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation · 2014
   Review
4. Cell therapy for cardiac repair--lessons from clinical trials.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2014
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Intramyocardial, autologous CD34+ cell therapy for refractory angina.2011

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as