Promoting Cardiac Regeneration and Repair Using Acellular Biomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ischemic heart disease is a common cause of end-stage heart failure and has persisted as one of the main causes of end stage heart failure requiring transplantation. Maladaptive myocardial remodeling due to ischemic injury involves multiple cell types and physiologic mechanisms. Pathogenic post-infarct remodeling involves collagen deposition, chamber dilatation and ventricular dysfunction. There have been significant improvements in medication and revascularization strategies. However, despite medical optimization and opportunities to restore blood flow, physicians lack therapies that directly access and manipulate the heart to promote healthy post-infarct myocardial remodeling. Strategies are now arising that use bioactive materials to promote cardiac regeneration by promoting angiogenesis and inhibiting cardiac fibrosis; and many of these strategies leverage the unique advantage of cardiac surgery to directly visualize and manipulate the heart. Although cellular-based strategies are emerging, multiple barriers exist for clinical translation. Acellular materials have also demonstrated preclinical therapeutic potential to promote angiogenesis and attenuate fibrosis and may be able to surmount these translational barriers. Within this review we outline various acellular biomaterials and we define epicardial infarct repair and intramyocardial injection, which focus on administering bioactive materials to the cardiac epicardium and myocardium respectively to promote cardiac regeneration. In conjunction with optimized medical therapy and revascularization, these techniques show promise to upregulate pathways of cardiac regeneration to preserve heart function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".