Intramyocardial bone marrow cell injection does not lead to functional improvement in patients with chronic ischaemic heart failure without considerable ischaemia

Comparative effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cell versus bone-marrow mononuclear cell transplantation in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There is no clear evidence on the comparative effectiveness of bone-marrow mononuclear cell (BMMNC) vs. mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) stem cell therapy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF).

METHODS

Using a systematic approach, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of stem cell therapy (BMMNCs or MSCs) in patients with HF were retrieved to perform a meta-analysis on clinical outcomes (major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), hospitalization for HF, and mortality) and echocardiographic indices (including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)) were performed using the random-effects model. A risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled based on the type of the outcome and subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the potential differences between the types of cells.

RESULTS

The analysis included a total of 36 RCTs (1549 HF patients receiving stem cells and 1252 patients in the control group). Transplantation of both types of cells in patients with HF resulted in a significant improvement in LVEF (BMMNCs: MD (95% CI) = 3.05 (1.11; 4.99) and MSCs: MD (95% CI) = 2.82 (1.19; 4.45), between-subgroup p = 0.86). Stem cell therapy did not lead to a significant change in the risk of MACE (MD (95% CI) = 0.83 (0.67; 1.06), BMMNCs: RR (95% CI) = 0.59 (0.31; 1.13) and MSCs: RR (95% CI) = 0.91 (0.70; 1.19), between-subgroup p = 0.12). There was a marginally decreased risk of all-cause death (MD (95% CI) = 0.82 (0.68; 0.99)) and rehospitalization (MD (95% CI) = 0.77 (0.61; 0.98)) with no difference among the cell types (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both types of stem cells are effective in improving LVEF in patients with heart failure without any noticeable difference between the cells. Transplantation of the stem cells could not decrease the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with controls. Future trials should primarily focus on the impact of stem cell transplantation on clinical outcomes of HF patients to verify or refute the findings of this study.

Stem Cell Therapy against Ischemic Heart Disease

Ischemic heart disease, which is one of the top killers worldwide, encompasses a series of heart problems stemming from a compromised coronary blood supply to the myocardium. The severity of the disease ranges from an unstable manifestation of ischemic symptoms, such as unstable angina, to myocardial death, that is, the immediate life-threatening condition of myocardial infarction. Even though patients may survive myocardial infarction, the resulting ischemia-reperfusion injury triggers a cascade of inflammatory reactions and oxidative stress that poses a significant threat to myocardial function following successful revascularization. Moreover, despite evidence suggesting the presence of cardiac stem cells, the fact that cardiomyocytes are terminally differentiated and cannot significantly regenerate after injury accounts for the subsequent progression to ischemic cardiomyopathy and ischemic heart failure, despite the current advancements in cardiac medicine. In the last two decades, researchers have realized the possibility of utilizing stem cell plasticity for therapeutic purposes. Indeed, stem cells of different origin, such as bone-marrow- and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells, circulation-derived progenitor cells, and induced pluripotent stem cells, have all been shown to play therapeutic roles in ischemic heart disease. In addition, the discovery of stem-cell-associated paracrine effects has triggered intense investigations into the actions of exosomes. Notwithstanding the seemingly promising outcomes from both experimental and clinical studies regarding the therapeutic use of stem cells against ischemic heart disease, positive results from fraud or false data interpretation need to be taken into consideration. The current review is aimed at overviewing the therapeutic application of stem cells in different categories of ischemic heart disease, including relevant experimental and clinical outcomes, as well as the proposed mechanisms underpinning such observations.

Autologous bone marrow stem cell transplantation for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials

Background

Although the safety and feasibility of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and bone marrow stem cell (BMSC) transplantation have been established, the effectiveness of this approach compared with CABG alone remains controversial. The aim of this updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the efficacy of this procedure.

Methods

A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted using studies sourced from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane literature databases to compare patients who received isolated CABG (CABG group) and BMSC transplantation with CABG (BMSC group). 22 studies were included.

Results

A total of 22 relevant publications with 820 patients were included. 432 patients received BMSC transplantation with CABG and 388 patients received isolated CABG. Compared with the CABG group, the BMSC transplantation group exhibited an improvement in the left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (mean difference (MD) = 3.87%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.93–5.80%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The present evidence suggests that autologous BMSC transplantation for patients undergoing CABG appears to be associated with an improvement in LV function compared with CABG alone. However, heterogeneity in the data suggests that patients respond differently to this therapy. Further research is needed to understand these differences.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13019-022-01838-2.

On the Road to Regeneration: "Tools" and "Routes" Towards Efficient Cardiac Cell Therapy for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiac regenerative medicine is a field bridging together biotechnology and surgical science. In this review, we present the explored surgical roads to cell delivery and the known effects of each delivery method on cell therapy efficiency. We also list the more recent clinical trials, exploring the safety and efficacy of delivery routes used for cardiac cell therapy approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is no consensus in defining which way is the most suitable for the delivery of the different therapeutic cell types to the damaged heart tissue. In addition, it emerged that the "delivery issue" has not been systematically addressed in each clinical trial and for each and every cell type capable of cardiac repair. Cardiac damage occurring after an ischemic insult triggers a cascade of cellular events, eventually leading to heart failure through fibrosis and maladaptive remodelling. None of the pharmacological or medical interventions approved so far can rescue or reverse this phenomenon, and cardiovascular diseases are still the leading cause of death in the western world. Therefore, for nearly 20 years, regenerative medicine approaches have focused on cell therapy as a promising road to pursue, with numerous preclinical and clinical testing of cell-based therapies being studied and developed. Nonetheless, consistent clinical results are still missing to reach consensus on the most effective strategy for ischemic cardiomyopathy, based on patient selection, diagnosis and stage of the disease, therapeutic cell type, and delivery route.