20 years of treating ischemic cardiomyopathy with mesenchymal stromal cells: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

This meta-analysis and systematic review compiles comparative data from 2004 to 2024, investigating the safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) derived from various tissues for the treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and associated heart failure. In addition, this review highlights the limitations of these interventions and provides valuable insights for future therapeutic approaches. Relevant articles were retrieved from the PubMed® database using targeted keywords. Our inclusion criteria included clinical trials with patients over 18 years of age, case reports and pilot studies. Animal experiments, in vitro studies, correlational and longitudinal studies, and study designs and protocols were excluded. Forty-nine original articles resulted in follow-up reports of 45 trials. MSCs from bone marrow, umbilical cord and adipose tissue were moderately well tolerated. Of the 1408 participants who received MSCs, 33 trials (67.3%) reported the occurrence of death or serious adverse events. These events resulted in 80 deaths (52% of reported cases) following MSC administration. Importantly, 41.3% of these deaths (n = 33) were not considered to be related to the intervention itself, while 40% of these deaths had no reported cause. As the primary outcome, the mean increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline was 5.75% (95% CI: 3.38% -8.11

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.