4.6 Article

Myocardial regeneration protocols towards the routine clinical scenario: An unseemly path from bench to bedside

期刊

ECLINICALMEDICINE
卷 50, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101530

关键词

Myocardial regeneration; Cardiac cell therapy; Cardiac stem cells; Pluripotent stem cells; Bone marrow stem cells

资金

  1. Ministry of University [PRIN2015 2015ZTT5KB_004, PRIN2017NKB2N4_005, PON-AIM - 1829805-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heart failure is the number one killer worldwide. The field of cardiac remuscularization faces challenges, but the search for clinically effective regenerative approaches remains active. This article provides an overview of the regenerative capacity of the adult mammalian heart and discusses interventions that have reached or are close to clinical use, as well as promising and innovative approaches for myocardial repair/regeneration.
Heart failure secondary to cardiomyocyte loss and/or dysfunction is the number one killer worldwide. The field of myocardial regeneration with its far-reaching primary goal of cardiac remuscularization and its hard-to-accomplish translation from bench to bedside, has been filled with ups and downs, steps forward and steps backward, controver-sies galore and, unfortunately, scientific scandals. Despite the present morass in which cardiac remuscularization is stuck in, the search for clinically effective regenerative approaches remains keenly active. Starting with a concise overview of the still highly debated regenerative capacity of the adult mammalian heart, we focus on the main inter-ventions, that have reached or are close to clinical use, critically discussing key findings, successes, and failures. Finally, some promising and innovative approaches for myocardial repair/regeneration still at the pre-clinical stage are discussed to offer a holistic view on the future of myocardial repair/regeneration for the prevention/management of heart failure in the clinical scenario.

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