Literature DB >> 10972335

Comparison of benefits on myocardial performance of cellular cardiomyoplasty with skeletal myoblasts and fibroblasts.

K A Hutcheson1, B Z Atkins, M T Hueman, M B Hopkins, D D Glower, D A Taylor.   

Abstract

Cellular cardiomyoplasty (CCM), or introduction of immature cells into terminally injured heart, can mediate repair of chronically injured myocardium. Several different cell types, ranging from embryonic stem cells to autologous skeletal myoblasts, have been successfully propagated within damaged heart and shown to improve myocardial performance. However, it is unclear if the functional advantages associated with CCM depend upon the use of myogenic cells or if similar results can be seen with other cell types. Thus, we compared indices of regional contractile (systolic) and diastolic myocardial performance following transplantation of either autologous skeletal myoblasts (Mb) or dermal fibroblasts (Fb) into chronically injured rabbit heart. In vivo left ventricular (LV) pressure (P) and regional segment length (SL) were determined in 15 rabbits by micromanometry and sonomicrometry 1 week following LV cryoinjury (CRYO) and again 3 weeks after autologous skeletal Mb or dermal Fb transplantation. Quantification of systolic performance was based on the linear regression of regional stroke work and end-diastolic (ED) SL. Regional diastolic properties were assessed using the curvilinear relationships between LVEDP and strain (epsilon) as well as LVEDP and EDSL. At study termination, cellular engraftment was characterized histologically in a blinded fashion. Indices of diastolic performance were improved following CCM with either Mb or Fb. However, only Mb transplantation improved systolic performance; Fb transfer actually resulted in a significant decline in systolic performance. These data suggest that both contractile and noncontractile cells can improve regional material properties or structural integrity of terminally injured heart, as reflected by improvements in diastolic performance. However, only Mb improved systolic performance in the damaged region, supporting the role of myogenic cells in augmenting contraction. Further studies are needed to define the mechanism by which these effects occur and to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of CCM with any cell type.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10972335     DOI: 10.1177/096368970000900307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Transplant        ISSN: 0963-6897            Impact factor:   4.064


  23 in total

Review 1.  Getting to the heart of myocardial stem cells and cell therapy.

Authors:  Tara L Rasmussen; Ganesh Raveendran; Jianyi Zhang; Daniel J Garry
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  On the fate of skeletal myoblasts in a cardiac environment: down-regulation of voltage-gated ion channels.

Authors:  H C Ott; S Berjukow; R Marksteiner; E Margreiter; G Böck; G Laufer; S Hering
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2004-06-11       Impact factor: 5.182

Review 3.  Stem cells and cardiac repair: a critical analysis.

Authors:  Jonathan H Dinsmore; Nabil Dib
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2008-01-31       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 4.  Unchain my heart: the scientific foundations of cardiac repair.

Authors:  Stefanie Dimmeler; Andreas M Zeiher; Michael D Schneider
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 14.808

5.  Stem cells to repair the broken heart: much ado about nothing?

Authors:  M Saha; R Zbinden; S R Redwood; M S Marber
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 6.  Systems approaches to preventing transplanted cell death in cardiac repair.

Authors:  Thomas E Robey; Mark K Saiget; Hans Reinecke; Charles E Murry
Journal:  J Mol Cell Cardiol       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 5.000

7.  Cell transplantation for cardiac regeneration: where do we stand?

Authors:  E J van den Bos; W J van der Giessen; D J Duncker
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.380

8.  In-vivo comparison of the acute retention of stem cell derivatives and fibroblasts after intramyocardial transplantation in the mouse model.

Authors:  Cajetan Lang; Sebastian Lehner; Andrei Todica; Guido Boening; Mathias Zacherl; Wolfgang-Michael Franz; Bernd Joachim Krause; Peter Bartenstein; Marcus Hacker; Robert David
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-07-26       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 9.  Induced pluripotent stem cells for regenerative cardiovascular therapies and biomedical discovery.

Authors:  Ali Nsair; W Robb MacLellan
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 10.  Tissue Engineering Strategies for Myocardial Regeneration: Acellular Versus Cellular Scaffolds?

Authors:  Maribella Domenech; Lilliana Polo-Corrales; Jaime E Ramirez-Vick; Donald O Freytes
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 6.389

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.