Local intramuscular transplantation of autologous bone marrow mononuclear cells for critical lower limb ischaemia.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease is a major health problem, and in about 1% to 2% of patients, the disease progresses to critical limb ischaemia (CLI), also known as critical limb-threatening ischaemia. In a substantial number of individuals with CLI, no effective treatment options other than amputation are available, with around a quarter of these patients requiring a major amputation during the following year. This is the second update of a review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of local intramuscular transplantation of autologous adult bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMNCs) as a treatment for CLI. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 8 November 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CLI in which participants were randomly allocated to intramuscular administration of autologous adult BMMNCs or control (either no intervention, conventional conservative therapy, or placebo). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, pain, and amputation. Our secondary outcomes were angiographic analysis, ankle-brachial index (ABI), pain-free walking distance, side effects and complications. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs involving a total of 176 participants with a clinical diagnosis of CLI. Participants were randomised to receive either intramuscular cell implantation of BMMNCs or control. The control arms varied between studies, and included conventional therapy, diluted autologous peripheral blood, and saline. There was no clear evidence of an effect on mortality related to the administration of BMMNCs compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 6.63; 3 studies, 123 participants; very low-certainty evidence). All trials assessed changes in pain severity, but the trials used different forms of pain assessment tools, so we were unable to pool data. Three studies individually reported that no differences in pain reduction were observed between the BMMNC and control groups. One study reported that reduction in rest pain was greater in the BMMNC group compared to the control group (very low-certainty evidence). All four trials reported the rate of amputation at the end of the study period. We are uncertain if amputations were reduced in the BMMNC group compared to the control group, as a possible small effect (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.99; 4 studies, 176 participants; very low-certainty evidence) was lost after undertaking sensitivity analysis (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.39; 2 studies, 89 participants). None of the included studies reported any angiographic analysis. Ankle-brachial index was reported differently by each study, so we were not able to pool the data. Three studies reported no changes between groups, and one study reported greater improvement in ABI (as haemodynamic improvement) in the BMMNC group compared to the control group (very low-certainty evidence). One study reported pain-free walking distance, finding no clear difference between BMMNC and control groups (low-certainty evidence). We pooled the data for side effects reported during the follow-up, and this did not show any clear difference between BMMNC and control groups (RR 2.13, 95% CI 0.50 to 8.97; 4 studies, 176 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to the concerns about risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified a small number of studies that met our inclusion criteria, and these differed in the controls they used and how they measured important outcomes. Limited data from these trials provide very low- to low-certainty evidence, and we are unable to draw conclusions to support the use of local intramuscular transplantation of BMMNC for improving clinical outcomes in people with CLI. Evidence from larger RCTs is needed in order to provide adequate statistical power to assess the role of this procedure.

Assessment of cell phone effect on dental socket healing in rat.

BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic waves can cause biological effects on repair process. Due to the proximity of the jawbone and the soft tissue around it in a part of the face with which it has the closest contact during the cell phone use, this study aims to investigate the effect of mobile waves on socket healing after tooth extraction in rats. METHODS: This experimental study was conducted on 32 rats. The case group was exposed to a 900 MHz frequency electromagnetic field for 30 min/d. Sacrificed eight rats from the case group and 7 rats from the control group on day 14, and 8 rats from the case group and 7 rats from the control group were sacrificed on day 28 at the end of the radiation period and CBCT and microscopic examinations on the maxillary bones and soft tissue were performed. RESULTS: According to the findings, the healing process was significantly different in two groups in terms of the percentage of new bone formation on day 14 after the end of radiation (P=0.014). The other measured parameters including the degree of inflammation, thickness of the formed bone, number of osteoblasts and Gray Scale had no significant difference between the two groups in any of the 14-day and 28-day intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed that intermittent exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields over a period of 20 hours has no significant effect on the healing process of alveolar socket after tooth extraction in rats.

Local intramuscular transplantation of autologous mononuclear cells for critical lower limb ischaemia.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease is a major health problem, and in about 1% to 2% of patients the disease progresses to critical limb ischaemia (CLI). In a substantial number of patients with CLI, no effective treatment option other than amputation is available and around a quarter of these patients will require a major amputation during the following year. This is an update of the review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of local intramuscular transplantation of autologous adult bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMNCs) as a treatment for critical limb ischaemia (CLI). SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched February 2014) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 1). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials of CLI in which participants were randomly allocated to intramuscular administration of autologous adult BMMNCs or control (either no intervention or conventional conservative therapy). We excluded studies on patients with intermittent claudication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials, assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality, and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or by the third author. MAIN RESULTS: Only two small studies, with a combined total of 57 participants, met our inclusion criteria and were finally included. They were classified as having a moderate risk of bias with unclear issues regarding their methods, and according to the GRADE approach, the overall quality of the evidence would be considered as moderate. In one study the effects of intramuscular injections of BMMNCs in the ischaemic lower limbs of patients with CLI were compared with control (standard conservative treatment). No deaths were reported and no significant difference was observed between the two groups for either pain (P = 0.37) or the ankle brachial index (ABI) parameter. However, the treatment group showed a significantly smaller proportion of participants undergoing amputation compared with the control group (P = 0.026).In the other study, following subcutaneous injections of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for five days, peripheral blood derived mononuclear cells were collected and then transplanted by intramuscular injections into ischaemic lower limbs. The effects were compared with daily intravenous prostaglandin E1 injections (control group). No deaths were reported. Pain reduction was greater in the treatment group than in the control group (P < 0.001) as was increase in ABI (mean increase 0.13 versus 0.02, P < 0.01). The treatment group experienced a statistically significant increase in pain-free walking distance (PFWD) compared with the control group (mean increase 306.4 m versus 78.6 m, P = 0.007). A smaller proportion of participants underwent amputation in the treatment group compared with the control group (0% versus 36%, P = 0.007). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The data from the published trials suggest that there is insufficient evidence to support this treatment. These results were based on only two trials which had a very small number of participants. Therefore evidence from larger randomised controlled trials is needed in order to provide adequate statistical power to assess the role of intramuscular mononuclear cell implantation in patients with CLI.

Granulocyte colony stimulating factor therapy for acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is the leading cause of death in developed countries, and current treatment modalities have failed to regenerate the dead myocardium resulting from the ischemic damage. Stem cells have the potential to regenerate the damaged myocardium. These cells can be mobilized from the bone marrow by factors such as granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of stem cell mobilization following granulocyte colony stimulating factor therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE (1950 to November week 3, 2010), EMBASE (1980 to 2010 week 48), BIOSIS Previews (1969 to 30 November 2010), ISI Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to 4 December 2010) and ISI Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (1990 to 4 December 2010). We also checked reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials including participants with a clinical diagnosis of AMI who were randomly allocated to the subcutaneous administration of G-CSF through a daily dose of 2.5, 5 or 10 microgram/kg for four to six days or placebo. No age or other restrictions were applied for the selection of patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials, assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality, and extracted data regarding the clinical efficacy and adverse outcomes. Disagreements were resolved by the third author. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials reported in 30 references in the review (354 participants). In all trials, G-CSF was compared with placebo preparations. Dosage of G-CSF varied among studies, ranging from 2.5 to 10 microgram/kg/day. Regarding overall risk of bias, data regarding the generation of randomization sequence and incomplete outcome data were at a low risk of bias; however, data regarding binding of personnel were not conclusive. The rate of mortality was not different between the two groups (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.80, P = 0.55). Regarding safety, the limited amount of evidence is inadequate to reach any conclusions regarding the safety of G-CSF therapy. Moreover, the results did not show any beneficial effects of G-CSF in patients with AMI regarding left ventricular function parameters, including left ventricular ejection fraction (RR 3.41, 95% CI -0.61 to 7.44, P = 0.1), end systolic volume (RR -1.35, 95% CI -4.68 to 1.99, P = 0.43) and end diastolic volume (RR -4.08, 95% CI -8.28 to 0.12, P = 0.06). It should also be noted that the study was limited since the trials included lacked long enough follow up durations. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence from small trials suggested a lack of benefit of G-CSF therapy in patients with AMI. Since data of the risk of bias regarding blinding of personnel were not conclusive, larger RCTs with appropriate power calculations and longer follow up durations are required in order to address current uncertainties regarding the clinical efficacy and therapy-related adverse events of G-CSF treatment.