Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialPubMedOpen access

Autologous adipose-derived stromal cell treatment for patients with refractory angina (MyStromalCell Trial): 3-years follow-up results.

Qayyum AA., Mathiasen AB., Helqvist S., Jørgensen E., Haack-Sørensen M., Ekblond A.

Randomized Controlled Trial on Cardiovascular Disease, published in J Transl Med (2019) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • 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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
J Transl Med (2019)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
31711513
PMCID
PMC6849216
DOI
10.1186/s12967-019-2110-1
NCT
NCT01449032
Citations
39

Abstract (original English)

Background Stem cell therapy is investigated as a treatment option for patients with ischemic heart disease. In this study, long-term safety and efficacy of autologous intra-myocardial injections of adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs) was studied in patients with refractory angina. Methods Sixty patients with coronary artery stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction were 2:1 randomised to intramyocardial injections of ASCs or saline and followed for 3 years. Results For patients in the ASC group, the bicycle exercise time and the exercise performance in watt were un-changed (383 ± 30 s to 370 ± 44 s, P = 0.052 and 81 ± 6 to 78 ± 10, P = 0.123, respectively), but the performance in METs was reduced significantly (4.2 ± 0.3 to 4.0 ± 0.4, P = 0.027) during the follow-up period. However, in the same period, there was in the placebo group a significant decline in bicycle exercise time (437 ± 53 s to 383 ± 58 s, P = 0.001), the exercise performance measured in watt (87 ± 12 W to 80 ± 12 W, P = 0.019) and in METs (4.5 ± 0.4 to 4.1 ± 0.4, P = 0.002). Moreover, angina measured as CCS class was significantly reduced in the ASC group but not in the placebo group (2.5 ± 0.9 to 1.8 ± 1.2, P = 0.002 and 2.5 ± 0.8 to 2.1 ± 1.3, P = 0.186, respectively). However, no significant change was observed between the two groups. Conclusions Patients receiving ASCs had improved cardiac

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAngina PectorisAutograftsCell Culture TechniquesCell SeparationDouble-Blind MethodExercise TestFemale

Browse all related research

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

Related research