Key result
Recent advancements in cell biology, biomaterial-based technologies, and 3D bioprinting offer promising strategies for cardiac regeneration, though current cell therapies remain hampered by poor clinical translation.
Recent advancements in cell biology, biomaterial-based technologies, and 3D bioprinting offer promising strategies for cardiac regeneration, though clinical translation remains challenging.
These approaches should not yet change clinical practice; leaves open whether bioprinting and biomaterials will overcome translational barriers.
Purpose of Review The regenerative capacity of the heart is insufficient to compensate for the pathological loss of cardiomyocytes during a large injury, such as a myocardial infarction. Therapeutic options for patients after cardiac infarction are limited: treatment with drugs that only treat the symptoms or extraordinary measures, such as heart transplantation. Cell therapies offer a promising strategy for cardiac regeneration. In this brief review, the major issues in these areas are discussed, and possible directions for future research are indicated. Recent Findings Cardiac regeneration can be obtained by at least two strategies: the first is direct to generate an ex vivo functional myocardial tissue that replaces damaged tissue; the second approach aims to stimulate endogenous mechanisms of cardiac repair. However, current cell therapies are still hampered by poor translation into actual clinical applications. Summary In this scenario, recent advancements in cell biology and biomaterial-based technologies can play a key role to design effective therapeutic approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carotenuto et al. (2021) conducted a review in Myocardial infarction and heart failure. Cardiac cell therapy and biomaterial-based technologies was evaluated. Recent advancements in cell biology, biomaterial-based technologies, and 3D bioprinting offer promising strategies for cardiac regeneration, though current cell therapies remain hampered by poor clinical translation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: