| Literature DB >> 28194186 |
Venkatesh Ponemone1, Saniya Gupta1, Dalip Sethi1, Manish Suthar1, Monika Sharma1, Richard J Powell2, Kenneth Lee Harris1, Nungshi Jungla3, Priyadarshini Arambam3, Upendra Kaul3, Ashok Seth3, Suhail Bukhari3.
Abstract
Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is the end stage of lower extremity peripheral vascular disease (PVD) in which severe obstruction of blood flow results in ischemic rest pain, ulcers and/or gangrene, and a significant risk of limb loss. This open-label, single-arm feasibility study evaluated the safety and therapeutic effectiveness of autologous bone marrow cell (aBMC) concentrate in revascularization of CLI patients utilizing a rapid point-of-care device. Seventeen (17) no-option CLI patients with ischemic rest pain were enrolled in the study. Single dose of aBMC, prepared utilizing an intraoperative point-of-care device, the Res-Q™ 60 BMC system, was injected intramuscularly into the afflicted limb and patients were followed up at regular intervals for 12 months. A statistically significant improvement in Ankle Brachial Index (ABI), Transcutaneous Oxygen Pressure (TcPO2), mean rest pain and intermittent claudication pain scores, wound/ ulcer healing, and 6-minute walking distance was observed following aBMC treatment. Major amputation-free survival (mAFS) rate and amputation-free rates (AFR) at 12 months were 70.6% and 82.3%, respectively. In conclusion, aBMC injections were well tolerated with improved tissue perfusion, confirming the safety, feasibility, and preliminary effectiveness of aBMC treatment in CLI patients.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28194186 PMCID: PMC5282442 DOI: 10.1155/2017/4137626
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Stem Cells Int Impact factor: 5.443
Figure 1Study enrollment design.
Clinical characteristics of the patients enrolled in the study at baseline.
| Baseline characteristics of enrolled patients | Value ( | % |
|---|---|---|
| Age (mean ± SD) | 48.8 ± 13.07 | |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 15 | 88.2 |
| Female | 2 | 11.8 |
| Affected limb | ||
| Left | 9 | 52.9 |
| Right | 8 | 47.1 |
| Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD) | 13 | 76.5 |
| Buerger's disease | 4 | 23.5 |
| Rutherford classification (grade 5) | 17 | 100 |
| Fontaine classification (grade IV) | 17 | 100 |
| Smoking status | ||
| Smoker | 15 | 88.2 |
| Nonsmoker | 2 | 11.8 |
| Comorbidities | ||
| Diabetes | 3 | 17.6 |
| Hypertension | 3 | 17.6 |
| Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) | 3 | 17.6 |
| Thrombocytopenia | 0 | 0 |
Cell product characterization.
| Preprocessed (mean ± SD) | Postprocessed (mean ± SD) | |
|---|---|---|
| Cellularity | ||
| TNCC (×108) | 2.64 ± 1.29 | 8.04 ± 3.65 |
| MNCC (×108) | 0.59 ± 0.26 | 2.16 ± 1.02 |
| CD34+ve (×106) | 1.33 ± 2.09 | 4.05 ± 3.81 |
| Cell viability (%) | 72.02 ± 19.73 | 88.94 ± 5.54 |
| Potency | ||
| Total CFUs (×104) | ND | 101.1 ± 113.61 |
| Sterility | No growth | No growth |
Mean fold increase in postprocessed sample is about 3x.
Figure 2(a) Analysis of changes in ABI from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.05; p < 0.01; p < 0.001). (b) Analysis of changes in TcPO2 from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.05; p < 0.01; p < 0.001).
Figure 3(a) Analysis of change in ABI using two imputation methods: “0” imputation and LOCF. (b) Analysis of change in TcPO2 using two imputation methods: “0” imputation and LOCF.
Figure 4Correlation of risk of amputation versus TcPO2.
Figure 5Analysis of 6-minute walking distance from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.01).
Figure 6(a) Analysis of rest pain and changes from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.01; p < 0.001). (b) Analysis of intermittent claudication pain score and changes from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.01; p < 0.001).
Figure 7Summary of ulcer, gangrene, and wound healing.
Figure 8Kaplan-Meier analysis of major amputation-free survival and major amputation-free rates.
Definition of the classification system used to quantify the collateral vessel number and size.
| Category | Number of collateralsa |
|---|---|
| Category 0 | 0 collateral vessels |
| Category 1 | 1–3 collateral vessels |
| Category 2 | 4–7 collateral vessels |
| Category 3 | ≥8 collateral vessels |
|
| |
| Collateral vessel grade | Size of collateral vessels |
|
| |
| Grade 0 | 0 collateral vessels |
| Grade 1 | ≤5 small |
| Grade 2 | >5 |
| Grade 3 | ≤5 large ± small |
| Grade 4 | >5 large ± small |
aSmall collaterals occupy <25% of the length of the imaged thigh and <50% of the diameter of the superficial femoral artery. Large collaterals occupy >25% of the length of the imaged thigh and ≥50% of the diameter of the superficial femoral artery.
Summary of CT Angiography category and grading results.
| Summary of CT Angio peripheral extremities: size (grade) and number (category) of collaterals vessels | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral vessel grade [ | Mean (SD) | Collateral vessel category [ | Mean (SD) | |||||||
| Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | Category 0 | Category 1 | Category 2 | Category 3 | |||
|
| ||||||||||
| Proximal thigh | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 9 (64.3) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 2 (14.3) | 0.58 (1.165) | 9 (64.3) | 1 (7.1) | 2 (14.3) | 0 | 0.42 (0.793) |
| Postintervention | 7 (50.0) | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 3 (21.4) | 1.00 (1.348) | 7 (50.0) | 2 (14.3) | 2 (14.3) | 1 (7.1) | 0.75 (1.055) |
| Mid thigh | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 7 (50.0) | 3 (21.4) | 2 (14.3) | 0 | 0.58 (0.793) | 7 (50.0) | 3 (21.4) | 2 (14.3) | 0 | 0.58 (0.793) |
| Postintervention | 5 (35.7) | 2 (14.3) | 3 (21.4) | 2 (14.3) | 1.17 (1.193) | 5 (35.7) | 3 (21.4) | 0 | 4 (28.6) | 1.25 (1.357)# |
| Distal thigh | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 8 (57.1) | 4 (28.6) | 0 | 0 | 0.33 (0.492) | 8 (57.1) | 3 (21.4) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.42 (0.669) |
| Postintervention | 4 (28.6) | 2 (14.3) | 4 (28.6) | 2 (14.3) | 1.33 (1.155)# | 4 (28.6) | 3 (21.4) | 1 (7.1) | 4 (28.6) | 1.42 (1.311)# |
| Proximal leg | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 10 (71.4) | 2 (14.3) | 0 | 0 | 0.17 (0.389) | 10 (71.4) | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.25 (0.622) |
| Postintervention | 5 (35.7) | 3 (21.4) | 2 (14.3) | 2 (14.3) | 1.08 (1.165)# | 5 (35.7) | 2 (14.3) | 4 (28.6) | 1 (7.1) | 1.08 (1.084)# |
| Mid leg | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 10 (71.4) | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.25 (0.622) | 10 (71.4) | 0 | 2 (14.3) | 0 | 0.33 (0.778) |
| Postintervention | 8 (57.1) | 3 (21.4) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.42 (0.669) | 8 (57.1) | 1 (7.1) | 2 (14.3) | 1 (7.1) | 0.67 (1.073) |
| Distal leg | ||||||||||
| Preintervention | 10 (71.4) | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.25 (0.622) | 10 (71.4) | 0 | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0.42 (0.996) |
| Postintervention | 10 (71.4) | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0 | 0.25 (0.622) | 10 (71.4) | 0 | 1 (7.1) | 1 (7.1) | 0.42 (0.996) |
# p < 0.05: values are statistically significant compared to preintervention.
Collateral vessel grading is a system used to quantify the size of the collateral vessels formed as follows:
Grade 0: no collateral vessels.
Grade 1: ≤5 small.
Grade 2: >5 small.
Grade 3: ≤5 large ± small.
Grade 4: >5 large ± small.
Collateral vessel category is a system used to quantify the number of collateral vessels present as follows:
Category 0: no collateral vessels.
Category 1: 1–3 collateral vessels.
Category 2: 4–7 collateral vessels.
Category 3: ≥8 collateral vessels.
Figure 9CT Angiography images showing qualitative analysis of degree of angiogenesis.
Figure 10Diagrammatical representation of the mechanism of action of cell therapy in CLI patients.