SynthesisClinical cardiology2018
A comprehensive meta-analysis of stem cell therapy for chronic angina.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive meta-analysis of stem cell therapy for chronic angina.Clinical cardiology · 2018Pooled it
- The Fingerprints of Biomedical Science in Internal Medicine.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Son of a Lesser God: The Case of Cell Therapy for Refractory Angina.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA substantial proportion of patients with coronary artery disease do not achieve complete revascularization and continue to experience refractory angina despite optimal medical therapy. Recently, stem cell therapy has emerged as a potential therapeutic option for these patients. However, findings of individual trials have been scrutinized because of their small sample sizes and lack of statistical power. Therefore, we conducted an updated comprehensive meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with the largest sample size ever reported on this subject. HYPOTHESIS: In patients with chronic angina stem cell therapy improves clinical outcomes.
methodsScientific databases and websites were searched for RCTs. Data were independently collected by 2 investigators, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data from 10 trials including 658 patients were analyzed.
resultsStem cell therapy improved Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class (risk ratio: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.15, P = 0.013), exercise capacity (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.88, P = 0.001), and left ventricular ejection fraction (SMD: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.00, P = 0.001) compared with placebo. It also decreased anginal episodes (SMD: -1.21, 95% CI: -2.40 to -0.02, P = 0.045) and myocardial perfusion defects (SMD: -0.70, 95% CI: -1.11 to -0.29, P = 0.001). However, no improvements in all-cause mortality were observed after a relatively short follow-up.
conclusionsIn patients with chronic angina on optimal medical therapy, stem cell therapy improves symptoms, exercise capacity, and left ventricular ejection fraction. These findings warrant confirmation using larger trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.