(Circulation. 2003;107:2638.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.
Editorials |
From the Center for Cardiovascular Development, Departments of Medicine, Molecular and Cellular Biology, and Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex.
Correspondence to Dr Michael D. Schneider, Center for Cardiovascular Development, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Rm 506D, Houston, TX 77030. E-mail michaels@bcm.tmc.edu
Key Words: Editorials stem cells cells, visceral myocytes
An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract. |
Heart failure due to myocardial infarction is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in developed countries.1 While that point needs no reiteration for the Circulation audience, its corollary does: that heart failure, in essence, is a myocyte-deficiency disease. Cell death, whether from acute infarction alone or from sustained sporadic losses in chronic heart failure, is not matched by sufficient cell replacement. Adult cardiac muscle cells have long lost much if not all of their capacity for proliferative growth, and differences in interpretation hinge on shadings between "none" and "almost none."2,3 What cell replacement does occur occurs by other means, including the recruitment of undifferentiated progenitor cellseg, from their niche in bone marrow through the circulation to the injured myocardium.4
See p 2733
Advances in fundamental molecular and cellular biology have paved the way for development of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine as a new therapeutic paradigm, in effect, the Regeneration Superhighway. Among such advances, so-called stem cells have been greeted with greatest enthusiasm, as well as religious and political alarm. Replacing dead cardiac muscle cells with living ones to preserve pump function is a goal of indisputable merit. But which cells have this capacity to transform from something that isnt a cardiac myocyte into something that is? Among the potential sources, why has controversy arisen for some? Which can be propagated and expanded best in tissue culture? How faithful is their differentiation, compared with "real" cardiac muscle cells? And, what governs their conversion?
The concept of "stemness" embraces two
Related Article:
Circulation 2003 107: 2733-2740.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Anversa, J. Kajstura, A. Leri, and R. Bolli Life and Death of Cardiac Stem Cells: A Paradigm Shift in Cardiac Biology Circulation, March 21, 2006; 113(11): 1451 - 1463. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Leri, J. Kajstura, and P. Anversa Cardiac Stem Cells and Mechanisms of Myocardial Regeneration Physiol Rev, October 1, 2005; 85(4): 1373 - 1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Anversa, J. Kajstura, and A. Leri Circulating Progenitor Cells: Search for an Identity Circulation, November 16, 2004; 110(20): 3158 - 3160. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2003 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |