Key result
Gene therapy, cell therapy, and tissue engineering are emerging therapeutic paradigms for cardiac electrophysiology, though several obstacles remain before clinical breakthroughs can be expected.
Gene and cell therapies offer potential future alternatives to electronic pacemakers and treatments for arrhythmias, though the field remains in its infancy.
These therapies remain investigational; leaves open whether gene or cell approaches will yield clinical alternatives to devices in arrhythmia care.
Gene therapy, cell therapy, and tissue engineering are emerging as novel experimental therapeutic paradigms for a variety of cardiovascular disorders. In the current report we will review the possible implications of these emerging technologies in the field of cardiac electrophysiology. Initially, the possible role of myocardial gene and cell therapies in creating a biological alternative to electronic pacemakers for the treatment of bradyarrhythmias will be discussed. This will be followed by a description of the possible applications of using similar strategies for the treatment of common tachyarrhythmias. Finally, the electrophysiological implications of cardiac stem cell therapy for heart failure, as well as the possible in vitro applications of stem cell technology for electrophysiological studies and drug screening, will be discussed. While these emerging strategies provide a paradigm shift from conventional treatment modalities, this field is still at its infancy and several obstacles, discussed in this review, should be overcome before any clinical breakthroughs can be expected.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yankelson et al. (2006) conducted a review in Cardiovascular disorders. Gene therapy, cell therapy, and tissue engineering was evaluated. Gene therapy, cell therapy, and tissue engineering are emerging therapeutic paradigms for cardiac electrophysiology, though several obstacles remain before clinical breakthroughs can be expected.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: