ReviewPostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2022
Hybrid techniques for myocardial regeneration: state of the art and future perspectives.
Review in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recovery from severe ischemic cardiomyopathy after high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention facilitated by levosimendan infusion and Impella CP support and prolonged use of a wearable defibrillator vest.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2024Article
- Left main coronary artery disease treated with beating heart surgery: 10-year single center results.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2024Article
- Magnesium bioresorbable scaffold (Magmaris) versus polymer biodegradable ultrathin drug-eluting stent (Ultimaster) in acute coronary syndrome. Mid-term outcomes (2 years).Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2024Article
- Regenerative and molecular therapies for myocardial repair (Review).Medicine internationalReview
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 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myocardium has a limited proliferative capacity, and adult hearts are considered incapable of regenerating after injury. A significant loss in the viable myocardium eventually diminishes the heart's ability to contract synchronously, leading to heart failure. Despite the development in interventional and pharmacological treatment for ischemic heart disease and heart failure, there is a significant number of highly symptomatic patients. For these individuals, treatments that stimulate myocardial regeneration can offer alleviation of dyspnea and angina and improvement in quality of life. Stem cells are known to promote neovascularization and endothelial repair. Various stem cell lines have been investigated over the years to establish those with the highest potential to differentiate into cardiomyocytes, including bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells, mesenchymal stromal cells, CD34+, CD133+, endothelial progenitor cells, and adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells. Stem cell studies were based on several delivery pathways: infusion into coronary vessels, direct injection into the injured region of the myocardium, and delivery within the novel bioengineered scaffolds. Acellular materials have also been investigated over the years. They demonstrate the therapeutic potential to promote angiogenesis and release of growth factors to improve the restoration of critical components of the extracellular matrix. This review summarizes hybrid cardiac regeneration treatments that combine novel bioengineering techniques with delivery approaches that cardiac surgeons can provide.
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.