Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33484381›Full record

ReviewClinical and experimental medicine2021

Stem cells therapy in acute myocardial infarction: a new era?

R G Carbone, A Monselise, G Bottino, S Negrini, F Puppo

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Development of a potency assay for CD34Scientific reports · 2023
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

R G CarboneDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
A MonseliseTel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
G BottinoDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
S NegriniDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
F PuppoDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. puppof@unige.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5393-0071
University of Genoa · ITTel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stem cells transplantation after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been claimed to restore cardiac function. However, this therapy is still restricted to experimental studies and clinical trials. Early un-blinded studies suggested a benefit from stem cell therapy following AMI. More recent blinded randomized trials have produced mixed results and, notably, the last largest pan-European clinical trial showed the inconclusive results. Furthermore, mechanisms of potential benefit remain uncertain. This review analytically evaluates 34 blinded and un-blinded clinical trials comprising 3142 patients and is aimed to: (1) identify the pros and cons of stem cell therapy up to a 6-month follow-up after AMI comparing benefit or no effectiveness reported in clinical trials; (2) provide useful information for planning future clinical programs of cardiac stem cell therapy.

Indexed as

Stem Cell TransplantationClinical Trials as TopicHumansMyocardial InfarctionAcute myocardial infarctionBone marrow cellsClinical trialsStem cellsTransplantation

Identifiers

PMID33484381
PMCPMC8053645
OpenAlexW3125129343

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.