Background & Objectives Stem cell based therapeutic treatments have been used as a management strategy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), a common primary factor causing death globally. We aimed to undertake a meta-analysis of studies including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining different stem cell preparations in AMI, as a definitive answer from this therapeutic approach is yet to emerge. Methods Following PROSPERO registration (CRD42024628552), a systematic search was conducted through PubMed database, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Data was analysed using RevMan 5.4.1. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), severe adverse events (SAEs), hospitalisation for heart failure, cancer incidence, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). A fixed-effect model was used to assess six outcomes: all-cause mortality, Re-MI, SAEs, heart failure hospitalisation, cancer incidence, and stroke. A model based on random effects depending on heterogeneity was used to assess LVEF. Results From 9,516 records, 48 studies were included for analysis based on available endpoints. No notable changes in all-cause mortality were observed between patients receiving stem cell therapy and those in the control group, according to the meta-analysis. Risk Ratio (RR) 0.73, SAEs (RR 0.93), Re-MI (RR 0.67), HF-related hospitalisation (RR 0.79), cancer (RR 0.82), or stroke (RR 0.81). Echocardiographic LVEF improved significantly at study end Mean difference (MD) 2.53% and difference from baseline (MD 3.89%), with high heterogeneity (I 2 - 76%). MRI-assessed LVEF showed no significant change at study end (MD 0.83%) but improved from baseline (MD 1.37%). Heterogeneity was low except for LVEF, with serious bias risk for most outcomes and very serious for Re-MI and SAEs, though their objective nature limits bias Interpretation & conclusions Analysis done found no significant benefit of stem cell-based therapies on clinical endpoints in AMI patients.
Aggarwal et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: