Comparative effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cell versus bone-marrow mononuclear cell transplantation in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Background There is no clear evidence on the comparative effectiveness of bone-marrow mononuclear cell (BMMNC) vs. mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) stem cell therapy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). Methods Using a systematic approach, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of stem cell therapy (BMMNCs or MSCs) in patients with HF were retrieved to perform a meta-analysis on clinical outcomes (major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), hospitalization for HF, and mortality) and echocardiographic indices (including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)) were performed using the random-effects model. A risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled based on the type of the outcome and subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the potential differences between the types of cells. Results The analysis included a total of 36 RCTs (1549 HF patients receiving stem cells and 1252 patients in the control group). Transplantation of both types of cells in patients with HF resulted in a significant improvement in LVEF (BMMNCs: MD (95% CI) = 3.05 (1.11; 4.99) and MSCs: MD (95% CI) = 2.82 (1.19; 4.45), between-subgroup p = 0.86). Stem cell therapy did not lead to a significant change in the risk of MACE (MD (95% CI) = 0.83 (0.67; 1.06), BMMNCs: RR (95% CI) = 0.59 (0.31; 1.13) and MSCs: RR (95% CI) = 0.91 (0.70; 1.19), between-subgroup p = 0.12). There was a marginally decreased risk of all-cause death (MD (95% CI) = 0.82 (0.68; 0.99)) and rehospitalization (MD (95% CI) = 0.77 (0.61; 0.98)) with no difference among the cell types (p > 0.05). Conclusion Both types of stem cells are effective in improving LVEF in patients with heart failure without any noticeable difference between the cells. Transplantation of the stem cells could not decrease the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with controls. Future trials should primarily focus on the impact of stem cell transplantation on clinical outcomes of HF patients to verify or refute the findings of this study

Correlation Between Biodemographic Parameters and the Size of Inferior Vena Cava and Collapsibility Index Using Ultrasound in Children: Biodemographic Parameters in Ultrasound in Children

Background and Aim:There is a concern regarding the relationship between biodemographicparameters at different ages and the size of inferior vena cava (IVC) and the collapsibilityindex (CI). Due to the lack of normative data on these parameters in children, we aimed touse ultrasound to determine the mean sizes of IVC in healthy children and calculate the CI.Methods: In this analytical cross-sectional study, we measured the IVC diameter in euvolemicchildren aged four weeks to 12 years. The maximum IVC diameter was recorded duringthe exhalation phase of the respiratory cycle, while the minimum diameter was recordedduring the inhalation phase using M-mode. Additionally, we calculated the CI by dividing thedifference between the maximum and minimum IVC diameters by the maximum diameter.Results: In this study, 534 euvolemic healthy children with a mean age of 6.77±3.22 yearswere assessed. The mean diameter of the maximum IVC during exhalation was 5.26±4.70and the mean diameter of the minimum IVC during inspiration was 2.96±2.89 mm. Themean CI in the present study was 0.5±0.13. Ultrasound measurements of IVC diameterduring exhalation, unlike IVC diameter during inhalation, were positively correlated withage, weight, and height. The mean IVC and CI had a direct and significant correlation withbiodemographic parameters, such as age, height, weight, and body mass index.Conclusion: Evaluating intravascular volume status holds significant clinical relevance,particularly in pediatric patients. Utilizing ultrasound to assess the IVC allows for swift and noninvasive analysis of an individual’s hemodynamics, impacting clinical decision-making positively.Establishing normative IVC measurements in healthy and euvolemic children can serve as valuablereference data for clinicians and help them accurately assess fluid status in unwell pediatric patients

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annulus: A Meta-Analysis.

Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a superior option to surgery in patients with small aortic annulus (SAA), it is not clear which type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) has better results in terms of echocardiographic hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expanding valves (SEVs) in patients with SAA who underwent TAVI regarding their impact on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were measured for the outcomes, as appropriate. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the generation type of devices and study designs. A total of 16 articles comprising 1 randomized trial, 3 propensity-matched studies, and 12 observational studies including 4,341 patients (1,967 in BEV and 2,374 in the SEV group) with SAA were included. The implantation of BEVs correlated with a lower indexed effective orifice area (MD -0.19 [-0.25 to -0.13]) and higher transvalvular mean pressure gradient (MD 3.91, 95% CI 2.96 to 4.87). Compared with SEVs, BEVs had increased risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM; RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.45) and severe PPM (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.15). However, BEV had lower moderate and severe paravalvular leak (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.69), risk of stroke (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.76), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91). The 1-year all-cause mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49) and cardiac-related mortality (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 9.81) were not different between the 2 groups. In conclusion, SEVs were associated with larger indexed effective orifice area and lower PPM but higher paravalvular leak. In contrast, patients with SEVs were more likely to develop stroke and required permanent pacemaker implantation. Both THVs did not show difference in terms of early and midterm all-cause and cardiac mortality. Because both types of THVs show similar results regarding mortality data, hemodynamics should be among the factors considered in decision making for patients with SAA who underwent TAVI