4.6 Article

Pluripotent stem cell-derived committed cardiac progenitors remuscularize damaged ischemic hearts and improve their function in pigs

期刊

NPJ REGENERATIVE MEDICINE
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41536-023-00302-6

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stem cell-derived committed cardiac progenitors (CCPs) showed potential in regenerative cardiology, as observed in a study where pluripotent stem cells were differentiated into CCPs and transplanted into infarcted pig hearts, resulting in significant improvement in heart function and reduction in infarction size.
Ischemic heart disease, which is often associated with irreversibly damaged heart muscle, is a major global health burden. Here, we report the potential of stem cell-derived committed cardiac progenitors (CCPs) have in regenerative cardiology. Human pluripotent embryonic stem cells were differentiated to CCPs on a laminin 521 + 221 matrix, characterized with bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing, and transplanted into infarcted pig hearts. CCPs differentiated for eleven days expressed a set of genes showing higher expression than cells differentiated for seven days. Functional heart studies revealed significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction at four and twelve weeks following transplantation. We also observed significant improvements in ventricular wall thickness and a reduction in infarction size after CCP transplantation (p-value < 0.05). Immunohistology analyses revealed in vivo maturation of the CCPs into cardiomyocytes (CM). We observed temporary episodes of ventricular tachyarrhythmia (VT) in four pigs and persistent VT in one pig, but the remaining five pigs exhibited normal sinus rhythm. Importantly, all pigs survived without the formation of any tumors or VT-related abnormalities. We conclude that pluripotent stem cell-derived CCPs constitute a promising possibility for myocardial infarction treatment and that they may positively impact regenerative cardiology.

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

4.6
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