4.7 Review

A Novel, Cell-Free Therapy to Enter Our Hearts: The Potential Role of Small EVs in Prevention and Treatment of CVD

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23073662

关键词

extracellular vesicles; cardiovascular disease; ischemia-reperfusion injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heart disease is a major global health issue, and there is a need for novel therapies. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), especially small EVs (sEVs), play a crucial role in intercellular communication and can be used for diagnosis and treatment. sEVs have low immunogenicity and potential for safe drug delivery. In the field of cardiology, sEVs have great potential.
Heart disease constitutes one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Current therapeutic techniques, such as interventional revascularization, although lifesaving, come along with myocardial injury related to the reperfusion itself, called ischemia-reperfusion injury, which is an added factor for increased morbidity. For that reason, there is an imperative need for novel therapies to be developed that would either prevent or treat myocardial injury. Extracellular vesicles (EVs), specifically small EVs (sEVs), have proven to be important mediators of intercellular communication. The fact that they carry information reflecting that of the parental cell makes them an ideal candidate for diagnostic purposes. sEVs derived from immunoregulatory cells, such as mesenchymal stem cells or cardiac progenitor cells, could also be used therapeutically to exert the primary immunomodulatory function but without carrying the side effects related to cell therapy. Furthermore, as a natural product, they have the added advantage of low immunogenicity, offering the potential for safe drug delivery. In the field of cardiology, there has been great interest in the therapeutic and diagnostic potential of sEVs with significant translational potential. Here, we review the potential use of sEVs in the context of myocardial ischemia and ischemia-reperfusion injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据