Literature DB >> 11568060

Is skeletal myoblast transplantation clinically relevant in the era of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors?

B Pouzet1, S Ghostine, J T Vilquin, I Garcin, M Scorsin, A A Hagège, D Duboc, K Schwartz, P Menasché.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is compelling experimental evidence that autologous skeletal muscle (SM) cell transplantation improves postinfarction cardiac function. This study assessed whether this benefit is still manifested in the clinically relevant setting of a treatment by ACE inhibitors. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A myocardial infarction was created in 99 rats by coronary artery ligation. They were divided into 4 groups. Two groups did not receive any drug and were intramyocardially injected 7 days after the infarct with either culture medium alone (control rats, n=16) or autologous SM cells (2.3x10(6) myoblasts) previously expanded ex vivo for 7 days (myoblasts, n=24). Two other groups received the ACE inhibitor perindoprilat (1 mg. kg(-1). d(-1)), started the day of the infarct and continued uninterruptedly thereafter, and underwent time-matched procedures, that is, they were intramyocardially injected at 7 days after infarction with either culture medium alone (ACE inhibitors, n=22) or autologous SM cells (2.5x10(6) myoblasts) previously expanded ex vivo for 7 days (ACE inhibitors+myoblasts, n=37). Left ventricular function was assessed by 2D echocardiography. At the end of the 2-month study, left ventricular ejection fraction (%, mean+/-SEM) was increased in all groups (myoblasts, 37.4+/-1.2; ACE inhibitors, 31.6+/-1.7; ACE inhibitors+myoblasts, 43.9+/-1.4) compared with that in control rats (19.8+/-0.7) (P<0.0001). The improvement in ejection fraction was similar in the ACE inhibitor and the myoblast groups (31.6+/-1.7 versus 37.4+/-1.2, P=0.0636). However, in the ACE inhibitor+myoblast group, this improvement was greater than that seen in hearts receiving either treatment alone (43.9+/-1.4 versus 31.6+/-1.7 in the ACE inhibitor group and 43.9+/-1.4. versus 37.4+/-1.2 in the myoblast group, P<0.0001 and P=0.0084, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: These data provide further support for the clinical relevance of autologous SM cell transplantation in that its cardioprotective effects are additive to those observed with ACE inhibitors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11568060     DOI: 10.1161/hc37t1.094593

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  9 in total

1.  Synthetic matrices to serve as niches for muscle cell transplantation.

Authors:  Sarah Fernandes; Shannon Kuklok; Joe McGonigle; Hans Reinecke; Charles E Murry
Journal:  Cells Tissues Organs       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 2.481

2.  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

Review 3.  Skeletal myoblasts for cardiac repair.

Authors:  Shazia Durrani; Mikhail Konoplyannikov; Muhammad Ashraf; Khawaja Husnain Haider
Journal:  Regen Med       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.806

4.  MyoCell, a cell-based, autologous skeletal myoblast therapy for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases.

Authors:  Husnain Kh Haider; Ye Lei; Muhammad Ashraf
Journal:  Curr Opin Mol Ther       Date:  2008-12

Review 5.  Myoblast-based cell transplantation.

Authors:  Philippe Menasché
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.214

Review 6.  New directions in strategies using cell therapy for heart disease.

Authors:  Silviu Itescu; Michael D Schuster; Alfred A Kocher
Journal:  J Mol Med (Berl)       Date:  2003-04-16       Impact factor: 4.599

7.  Colony-stimulating factor-1 transfection of myoblasts improves the repair of failing myocardium following autologous myoblast transplantation.

Authors:  Seyedhossein Aharinejad; Dietmar Abraham; Patrick Paulus; Karin Zins; Michael Hofmann; Wolfgang Michlits; Mariann Gyöngyösi; Karin Macfelda; Trevor Lucas; Karola Trescher; Michael Grimm; E Richard Stanley
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2008-04-23       Impact factor: 10.787

8.  Advances in cell transplantation therapy for diseased myocardium.

Authors:  Outi M Villet; Antti Siltanen; Tommi Pätilä; M Ali A Mahar; Antti Vento; Esko Kankuri; Ari Harjula
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2011-06-28       Impact factor: 5.443

9.  Comparison of Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes, Cardiovascular Progenitors, and Bone Marrow Mononuclear Cells for Cardiac Repair.

Authors:  Sarah Fernandes; James J H Chong; Sharon L Paige; Mineo Iwata; Beverly Torok-Storb; Gordon Keller; Hans Reinecke; Charles E Murry
Journal:  Stem Cell Reports       Date:  2015-11-10       Impact factor: 7.765

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.