Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg Strasse 1, Hannover, Germany.
Eur Heart J. 2011 May;32(10):1197-206. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr018. Epub 2011 Feb 28.
In the absence of effective endogenous repair mechanisms after cardiac injury, cell-based therapies have rapidly emerged as a potential novel therapeutic approach in ischaemic heart disease. After the initial characterization of putative endothelial progenitor cells and their potential to promote cardiac neovascularization and to attenuate ischaemic injury, a decade of intense research has examined several novel approaches to promote cardiac repair in adult life. A variety of adult stem and progenitor cells from different sources have been examined for their potential to promote cardiac repair and regeneration. Although early, small-scale clinical studies underscored the potential effects of cell-based therapy largely by using bone marrow (BM)-derived cells, subsequent randomized-controlled trials have revealed mixed results that might relate, at least in part, to differences in study design and techniques, e.g. differences in patient population, cell sources and preparation, and endpoint selection. Recent meta-analyses have supported the notion that administration of BM-derived cells may improve cardiac function on top of standard therapy. At this stage, further optimization of cell-based therapy is urgently needed, and finally, large-scale clinical trials are required to eventually proof its clinical efficacy with respect to outcomes, i.e. morbidity and mortality. Despite all promises, pending uncertainties and practical limitations attenuate the therapeutic use of stem/progenitor cells for ischaemic heart disease. To advance the field forward, several important aspects need to be addressed in carefully designed studies: comparative studies may allow to discriminate superior cell populations, timing, dosing, priming of cells, and delivery mode for different applications. In order to predict benefit, influencing factors need to be identified with the aim to focus resources and efforts. Local retention and fate of cells in the therapeutic target zone must be improved. Further understanding of regenerative mechanisms will enable optimization at all levels. In this context, cell priming, bionanotechnology, and tissue engineering are emerging tools and may merge into a combined biological approach of ischaemic tissue repair.
在心脏损伤后缺乏有效的内源性修复机制的情况下,基于细胞的治疗方法迅速成为缺血性心脏病的一种潜在新的治疗方法。在最初描述了假定的内皮祖细胞及其促进心脏新生血管形成和减轻缺血损伤的潜力之后,十年来,密集的研究已经检查了几种促进成年人心肌修复的新方法。已经研究了来自不同来源的各种成体干细胞和祖细胞,以评估它们促进心脏修复和再生的潜力。尽管早期的小规模临床研究强调了细胞治疗的潜在作用,主要是使用骨髓(BM)衍生细胞,但随后的随机对照试验显示出混杂的结果,这些结果可能至少部分与研究设计和技术的差异有关,例如患者人群、细胞来源和制备以及终点选择的差异。最近的荟萃分析支持这样的观点,即给予 BM 衍生细胞可能会在标准治疗的基础上改善心脏功能。在现阶段,迫切需要进一步优化细胞治疗,最终需要进行大规模临床试验,以最终证明其在预后方面的临床疗效,即发病率和死亡率。尽管有所有的承诺,但是存在的不确定性和实际限制削弱了干细胞/祖细胞治疗缺血性心脏病的应用。为了推动该领域的发展,需要在精心设计的研究中解决几个重要方面:比较研究可能有助于区分优越的细胞群体、时间、剂量、细胞预刺激和不同应用的传递方式。为了预测益处,需要确定影响因素,旨在集中资源和努力。必须改善治疗靶区中细胞的局部保留和命运。进一步了解再生机制将使所有层面的优化成为可能。在这种情况下,细胞预刺激、生物纳米技术和组织工程是新兴的工具,并可能融合为缺血组织修复的综合生物学方法。