Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Direct implantation versus platelet-rich fibrin-embedded adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells in treating rat acute myocardial infarction.

Sun CK., Zhen YY., Leu S., Tsai TH., Chang LT., Sheu JJ.

Animal Study on Cardiovascular Disease, Chronic Inflammation, published in Int J Cardiol (2014) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Animal Study
Journal
Int J Cardiol (2014)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
24685001
DOI
10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.03.015
Citations
40

Abstract (original English)

This study tested whether adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSC) embedded in platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) scaffold is superior to direct ADMSC implantation in improving left ventricular (LV) performance and reducing LV remodeling in a rat acute myocardial infarction (AMI) model of left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) ligation. Twenty-eight male adult Sprague Dawley rats equally divided into group 1 [sham control], group 2 (AMI only), group 3 (AMI+direct ADMSC implantation), and group 4 (AMI+PRF-embedded autologous ADMSC) were sacrificed on day 42 after AMI. LV systolic and diastolic dimensions and volumes, and infarct/fibrotic areas were highest in group 2, lowest in group 1 and significantly higher in group 3 than in group 4, whereas LV performance and LV fractional shortening exhibited a reversed pattern (p<0.005). Protein expressions of inflammation (oxidative stress, IL-1β, MMP-9), apoptosis (mitochondrial Bax, cleaved PARP), fibrosis (Smad3, TGF-β), and pressure-overload biomarkers (BNP, MHC-β) displayed a pattern similar to that of LV dimensions, whereas anti-inflammatory (IL-10), anti-apoptotic (Bcl-2), and anti-fibrotic (Smad1/5, BMP-2) indices showed a pattern similar to that of LV performance among the four groups (all p<0.05). Angiogenesis biomarkers at protein (CXCR4, SDF-1α, VEGF), cellular (CD31+, CXCR4+, SDF-1α+), and immunohistochemical (small ve

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Adipose TissueAnimalsBlood PlateletsFibrinMaleMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationMyocardial InfarctionRandom AllocationRatsRats, Sprague-Dawley

Browse all related research

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

Related research