Evidence mapPaperPMID 40922747Full record

ReviewAdvanced pharmaceutical bulletin2025

Therapeutic Potential of Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Angiogenesis and Cardiac Regeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Rodent Models.

Samaneh Narimani, Reza Rahbarghazi, Hanieh Salehipourmehr, Maryam Taghavi Narmi, Hamid Lotfimehr, Robab Mehdipour

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Samaneh NarimaniDepartment of Applied Cell Sciences, Faculty of Advanced Medical Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8369-7089
Reza RahbarghaziDepartment of Applied Cell Sciences, Faculty of Advanced Medical Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3864-9166
Hanieh SalehipourmehrResearch Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Maryam Taghavi NarmiStem Cell Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Hamid LotfimehrStem Cell Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Robab MehdipourResearch Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Myocardial infarction (MI), the leading cause of human mortality, is induced by a sudden interruption of blood supply. Among various stem cell types, endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) are novel and valid cell sources for the restoration of vascularization in the ischemic tissue. The present study aimed to evaluate the regenerative properties of EPCs in rodent models of MI. Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was implemented in Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases without language limitation in Sep 2024. Of the 67 papers pooled, 42 met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to multiple analyses. Results: Compared to the MI group, the overall effect size was confirmed in the groups receiving EPC with enhanced angiogenesis (SMD: 2.02, CI 95%: 1.51-2.54, Conclusion: These data showed that EPC transplantation is an alternative therapy to ameliorate ischemic myocardium in rodents via the stimulation of angiogenesis, reduction of fibrosis, and improvement of fractional shortening and ejection fraction.

Indexed as

Endothelial progenitor cellsMyocardial infarctionRegenerative outcomesRodents

Identifiers

PMID40922747
PMCPMC12413962

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.