You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Non-invasive in vivo imaging of cardiac stem/progenitor cell biodistribution and retention after intracoronary and intramyocardial delivery in a swine model of chronic ischemia reperfusion injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-017-1157-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
María Collantes, Beatriz Pelacho, María José García-Velloso, Juán José Gavira, Gloria Abizanda, Itziar Palacios, Luis Rodriguez-Borlado, Virginia Álvarez, Elena Prieto, Margarita Ecay, Eduardo Larequi, Iván Peñuelas, Felipe Prósper |
| Abstract |
The safety and efficacy of cardiac stem/progenitor cells (CSC) have been demonstrated in previous preclinical and clinical assays for heart failure. However, their optimal delivery route to the ischemic heart has not yet been assessed. This study was designed to determine by a non-invasive imaging technique (PET/CT) the biodistribution and acute retention of allogeneic pig CSC implanted by two different delivery routes, intracoronary (IC) and intramyocardial (IM), in a swine preclinical model of chronic ischemia-reperfusion. Ischemia-reperfusion was induced in six Goettingen hybrid minipigs by 90 min coronary artery occlusion followed by reperfusion. Thirty days later, animals were allocated to receive IC (n = 3) or NOGA(®)-guided IM injection (n = 3) of 50 million of (18)F-FDG/GFP-labeled allogeneic pig CSC. Acute retention was quantified by PET/CT 4 h after injection and cell engraftment assessed by immunohistochemical quantification of GFP(+) cells three days post-injection. Biodistribution of (18)F-FDG-labeled CSC was clearly visualized by PET/CT imaging and quantified. No statistical differences in acute cell retention (percentage of injected dose, %ID) were found in the heart when cells were administered by NOGA(®)-guided IM (13.4 ± 3.4%ID) or IC injections (17.4 ± 4.1%ID). Interestingly, engrafted CSC were histologically detected only after IM injection. PET/CT imaging of (18)F-FDG-labeled CSC allows quantifying biodistribution and acute retention of implanted cells in a clinically relevant pig model of chronic myocardial infarction. Similar levels of acute retention are achieved when cells are IM or IC administered. However, acute cell retention does not correlate with cell engraftment, which is improved by IM injection. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 23% |
| Researcher | 11 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 8% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,055,371
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,708
of 4,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,583
of 308,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#26
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,013 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.