This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Data Supplement All Versions of this Article: 97/8/756    most recent 01.RES.0000185811.71306.8bv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Erbs, S. Articles by Hambrecht, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Erbs, S. Articles by Hambrecht, R. Related Collections Contractile function Other Treatment Chronic ischemic heart disease Coronary circulation Related Article

(Circulation Research. 2005;97:756.)
© 2005 American Heart Association, Inc.

Clinical Research

Transplantation of Blood-Derived Progenitor Cells After Recanalization of Chronic Coronary Artery Occlusion

First Randomized and Placebo-Controlled Study

Sandra Erbs, Axel Linke, Volker Adams, Karsten Lenk, Holger Thiele, Klaus-Werner Diederich, Frank Emmrich, Regine Kluge, Kai Kendziorra, Osama Sabri, Gerhard Schuler, Rainer Hambrecht

From the Department of Cardiology, Heart Center (S.E., A.L., V.A., K.L., H.T., K.-W.D., G.S., R.H.), Institute of Clinical Immunology and Transfusion Medicine (F.E.), and Department of Nuclear Medicine (R.K., K.K., O.S.), University of Leipzig, Germany.

Correspondence to Rainer Hambrecht, MD, Professor of Medicine, Dept of Internal Medicine/Cardiology, Univ of Leipzig, Heart Center, Struempellstrasse 39, 04289 Leipzig, Germany. E-mail hamr{at}medizin.uni-leipzig.de

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
Transplantation of blood-derived circulating progenitor cells (CPC) has been shown to improve myocardial regeneration after myocardial infarction. It remains unclear whether CPC transplantation exerts beneficial effects also in patients with chronic myocardial ischemia. We initiated a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the impact of intracoronary infusion of CPCs on coronary vasomotion and left ventricular (LV) function in patients after recanalization of chronic coronary total occlusion (CTO). After recanalization of CTO, 26 patients (age, 63±2 years; LV ejection fraction, 53±2%) were randomly assigned to the treatment (intracoronary transplantation of CPCs) or control group. Coronary flow reserve in response to adenosine (2.4 mg/min) was measured in the target vessel at the beginning of the study and after 3 months. LV function and infarct size were assessed by MRI and metabolism by ¹⁸F deoxyglucose positron emission tomography. CPC application resulted in an increase in coronary flow reserve by 43% from 2.3±0.3 to 3.3±0.5 (P<0.05 versus beginning and control). At 3 months, the number of hibernating segments in the target region (from 2.9±0.6 to 2.0±0.6 segments, P<0.05 versus beginning and control) had declined in the treatment group, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group. MRI revealed a reduction in infarct size by 16% and an increase in LV ejection fraction by 14% in the treatment group (from 51.7±3.7 to 58.9±3.2%; P<0.05 versus beginning and control) because of an augmented wall motion in the target region. Hence, intracoronary transplantation of CPCs after recanalization of CTO results in an improvement of macro- and microvascular function and contributes to the recruitment of hibernating myocardium.

Key Words: ischemic heart disease • endothelial dysfunction • progenitor cells • hibernating myocardium • reperfusion

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
Recently, bone marrow–derived circulating progenitor cells (CPCs) have been shown to promote formation of entirely new vessels into ischemic tissues by a process termed vasculogenesis.^1–3 The CPC-mediated augmentation in myocardial neoangiogenesis in animal experiments prompted researchers to conduct pioneer clinical trials.^3–10 In the TOPCARE-AMI (Transplantation Of Progenitor Cells And Regeneration Enhancement in Acute Myocardial Infarction) study, bone marrow–derived and progenitor cells from peripheral blood administered after successful recanalization in acute myocardial infarction were shown to improve myocardial perfusion, increase left ventricular (LV) contractility, and attenuate LV remodeling equally effective.⁹ Perin et al were able to extend the knowledge with regard to bone marrow–derived stem cell therapy in patients with severe ischemic heart failure: intramyocardial injection of these cells at the site of ischemia was elucidated to increase blood flow and improve regional and global ventricular function.⁵ Additional evidence is emerging from the first randomized study, BOOST (BOne marrOw transfer to enhance ST-elevation infarct regeneration), that indicates an improvement in global LV ejection fraction (LV-EF) of 7% using bone marrow–derived stem cells in patients with reperfused acute myocardial infarction.¹⁰

Even after successful recanalization of chronic total occlusion (CTO) by angioplasty with stent implantation, the myocardium partially remains hibernating, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood.¹¹ One might speculate that cardiomyocytes in the border zone of the old infarct are condemned to die by necrosis and apoptosis caused by a persistent impairment of the coronary vasodilatory reserve and, therefore, mutilation of oxygen supply promoting LV remodeling.

Given the therapeutic potential of CPCs, we hypothesized that in patients after successful recanalization of CTO, the additional intracoronary application of CPCs improves coronary vasomotion and enhances global LV function, possibly by the recruitment of hibernating myocardium. In the present study, blood-derived progenitor cells were used because they can be harvested less invasively and seem to be equally effective with respect to the improvement in LV function compared with bone marrow–derived cells in acute myocardial infarction.⁹

	Materials and Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
An expanded description of the methods is provided in the online data supplement available at http://circres.ahajournals.org.

Selection of Patients
Patients with CTO, clinical signs or objective measures of myocardial ischemia and local wall-motion abnormalities were screened. CTO was defined as an occlusion of a native coronary artery for >30 days with no luminal continuity and with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade 0 or 1.¹² Patients with unstable angina pectoris, indication for coronary artery bypass grafting, any history of malignant disease, and diabetic retinopathy were excluded from study participation.

Study Protocol
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Leipzig and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients before randomization. After successful recanalization of CTO patients underwent MRI to measure LV function and ¹⁸F deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) to determine myocardial hibernation. Subsequently, all patients were subcutaneously injected twice a day with filgrastin (300 µg of granulocyte colony stimulating factor [G-CSF]) over 4 days to increase the amount of CPCs in the blood. At day 4, 400 mL of venous blood were collected from all patients, mononuclear cells were purified and ex vivo cultured for 4 days in endothelial-specific medium as described in detail below to select for CPCs.^1,2,13 Immediately after invasive assessment of coronary vasomotion, patients randomized to the CPC group received intracoronary administration of the selected CPCs, whereas patients in the control group were infused with cell-free serum into the coronary circulation of the target region. The suspension, containing either CPCs (an average of 69±14x10⁶ cells) or serum, was prepared by the Department of Transfusion Medicine, University of Leipzig, and provided in a 20 mL syringe ready for intracoronary injection. Neither the interventionalist nor the clinical investigator was aware of whether patients received CPCs or serum. After 3 months, MRI, FDG-PET, and invasive measurement of coronary vasomotion were repeated.

Preparation of Progenitor Cells
Cells were processed according to German law regarding the preparation of pharmaceutical products including hematopoietic stem cells. CPCs were selected as described in the online data supplement and resuspended in a final volume of 20 mL of physiological NaCl supplemented with 10% autologous patient serum.⁹ Ninety percent of the selected cells had the typical feature of CPCs to bind lectin and take up acetylated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (Figure 1A).^1,2,9 An aliquot of these cells was further characterized by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) analysis (Figure 1B).

View larger version (31K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Characterization of CPCs by FACS. A, Red color in the top panel identifies the binding of acetylated LDL (Di-acLDL); the green fluorescence in the middle panel corresponds to the FITC-labeling of lectin, which binds to circulating progenitor cells. The lower panel shows the merged picture and identifies CPCs as acLDL/lectin double-positive cells by the yellow fluorescence. A representative FACS analysis is depicted on the right. The staining intensity corresponding to the uptake of Di-acLDL is depicted on the x axis; the fluorescence signal of FITC, which identifies the lectin binding of CPCs, is shown on the y axis. Ninety percent of the selected cells had the typical feature of CPCs to bind lectin and take up acetylated LDL and can be found in the right upper panel of the FACS scatter. B, An aliquot of these cells was further characterized by FACS analysis using the following antibodies: anti-CD3 and anti-CXCR4 (Becton-Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany); anti-KDR (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2; R&D Systems, Wiesbaden, Germany); anti CD34 and anti-CD133 (Miltenyi, Bergisch-Gladbach, Germany); and anti–VE-cadherin (VeCad) (Bender MedSystems, San Bruno, Calif). The percentages of cells that expressed the stem cell markers CD34 and CD133 were 55±6% and 32±7%, respectively. The majority of the cells was negative for the lymphocyte marker CD3 (only 11±4% were positive for CD3) but expressed KDR (51±6% of the CPCs) and VeCad (50±6% of the CPCs) as signs of an endothelial lineage commitment and the homing factor CXCR4 (69±7% of the CPCs).

Application of Circulating Progenitor Cells
At a mean time of 10±1 days after successful recanalization of CTO, an over-the-wire balloon catheter (Ninja, Cordis, Roden, the Netherlands) was advanced into the stent previously implanted during the reperfusion procedure; the balloon was inflated with low pressure to completely block antegrade blood flow, and a total of 20 mL of progenitor cell suspension (in the CPC group) or cell-free serum (in the control group) was administered distally to the occluding balloon through the central port of the catheter as described in detail in the online data supplement.⁹

Invasive Measurement of Coronary Endothelial Function
Saline, acetylcholine, adenosine, and nitroglycerin, respectively, were administered through an infusion catheter into the target vessel to measure coronary vasomotion as described in detail previously.¹⁴ Average blood-flow velocity was assessed by Doppler velocimetry (Flow Map, Cardiometrics). Serial coronary angiograms were obtained at the end of each infusion, coronary diameters were assessed, and the vasodilative or vasoconstrictive responses and coronary flow reserve and coronary blood flow were calculated.

PET, Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography, and MRI
Myocardial hibernation was determined by FDG-PET and ^99mTc-tetrofosmine single-photon emission computed tomography according to standard protocols at 8±1 days after recanalization of CTO and at 3 months of follow-up.^15–17 LV-EF, end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes, LV mass, and volumes of regions with delayed enhancement (using gadolinium-benzyloxypropionictetraacetate [0.2 mmol/kg body weight]) were measured by cardiac MRI (1.5 T MR scanner; Intera CV, Philips, Best, The Netherlands) according to a previously validated protocol at 8±1 days after recanalization of CTO and at 3 months.^17,18

Follow-Up Studies
Clinical data, medication, and safety laboratory data were recorded. Patients were seen at follow-up visits every week for 3 months.

Statistical Analysis
Data are expressed as mean±SEM. Comparisons within each group and between the groups were performed using a t test, a Mann–Whitney U test, or a 2-way repeated measures ANOVA, followed by a Tukey post hoc test, where appropriate. A probability value of P<0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
Clinical Characteristics at Baseline and Cardiac Medication
After successful recanalization of CTO, 26 patients were randomly assigned to the CPC group (13 patients) or the control group (13 patients). Patients in the control group did not differ significantly from those in the CPC group with respect to the demographic, clinical, angiographic parameters, or medication (supplemental Table I). Cardiac medication did not change during the 4-week period before enrollment or during the 3-month follow-up period.

Of the 26 chronically occluded vessels selected for the study, 11 (42.3%) were left anterior descending coronary artery, 4 (15.4%) the circumflex coronary artery, and 11 (42.3%) the right coronary artery. The distribution of target vessels was comparable between both groups.

Clinical Follow-Up
One patient from the control group was excluded from further analysis because the initially successfully reopened chronically occluded vessel was found to be reoccluded at the scheduled time of intracoronary serum application without any chance of successful recanalization. One patient in the CPC group and 1 patient in the control group withdraw consent of study participation because of personal reasons. Therefore, follow-up data for invasive measurement of coronary vasomotor function are available from 12 patients of the CPC group and 11 patients randomized to the control group.

In 1 patient in the CPC group, MRI could not be performed because the patient had an implanted cardioverter defibrillator. Therefore, follow-up data for MRI are available from 11 patients of the CPC group and from 11 patients of the control group.

In 1 patient of the CPC group and 2 patients of the control group, the FDG-PET pictures could not be analyzed because of a superimposition of the heart by intestine. Therefore, FDG-PET data are reported from 11 patients of the CPC group and 9 patients of the control group.

Rate of In-Stent Restenosis
Coronary in-stent restenosis occurred in 3 of 12 patients in the CPC group (25%) and in 3 of 11 patients in the control group (27%). However, in-stent restenoses were not flow limiting at rest, and all patients angiographically demonstrated thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade 3. No other clinical events, particularly no reocclusions, were evident in either of the groups.

Stimulation With G-CSF and Serum Inflammatory Markers
One patient in each group reported headache, and 1 patient in the control group developed fever during G-CSF stimulation. However, symptoms were reversible, and body temperature returned to normal immediately after discontinuation of subcutaneous G-CSF injection.

G-CSF application resulted in a comparable increase in serum C-reactive protein levels (supplemental Figure IA) and blood leukocyte count (supplemental Figure IB) in the CPC and the control groups, but both parameters returned to baseline values within 4 days after G-CSF application was stopped. However, neither G-CSF injection nor intracoronary transplantation of CPCs caused any elevation in troponin T levels. In addition, intracoronary application of CPCs/serum was not associated with an increase in body temperature, leukocyte count, or C-reactive protein levels in the follow-up period of 3 months.

Assessment of Coronary Endothelial Function
Acetylcholine-Induced Pathologic Vasoconstriction and Coronary Blood Flow
At beginning of the study (post-percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]), patients in the CPC and the control groups had similar responses to intracoronary acetylcholine stimulation, depicted as the percentage change from baseline in the luminal diameter. In the CPC group, the mean vasoconstrictive response after infusions of 0.072, 0.72, and 7.2 µg/min of acetylcholine were –10±3, –21±5, and –34±4%, respectively. In the control group, they were –22±7, –36±12, and –44±15%, respectively (P=NS between the groups).

Three months after CPC application, coronary vasoconstriction was reduced by 88% (from –0.24±0.06 to –0.03±0.04 mm; P<0.01 versus beginning of the study [post-PCI] within the CPC group; P<0.01), by 65% (from –0.51±0.10 to –0.18±0.11 mm; P<0.01 versus post-PCI within the CPC group; P<0.05 for the change versus control group), and by 72% (from –0.87±0.12 to –0.24±0.09 mm; P<0.01 versus post-PCI within the CPC group; P<0.01 versus control group at 3 months), respectively, in response to 0.072, 0.72, and 7.2 µg/min of acetylcholine (Figure 2A). This improved vasodilatory capacity of the epicardial coronary target vessels after CPC application was associated with an increase in coronary blood flow during infusion of acetylcholine (supplemental Table II).

View larger version (10K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Endothelium-dependent, agonist-mediated coronary vasomotion. A, CPC group: change in coronary target vessel diameter in response to acetylcholine (0.072 µg/min, 0.72 µg/min, 7.2 µg/min) stimulation vs baseline (infusion of 0.9% saline). , At beginning of the study (post-PCI); , at 3 months. The paradoxic vasoconstriction in response to acetylcholine is significantly blunted 3 months after intracoronary CPC infusion. *P<0.01 vs post-PCI, #P<0.01 vs control group at 3 months, P<0.05 for the change (post-PCI vs 3 months) vs control group. B, Control group: change in coronary target vessel diameter in response to acetylcholine (0.072 µg/min, 0.72 µg/min, 7.2 µg/min) stimulation vs baseline (infusion of 0.9% saline). , At beginning of the study (post-PCI); , at 3 months. The paradoxic vasoconstriction in response to acetylcholine remains virtually unchanged within the 3 months of the study period.

In the control group, the changes in coronary artery diameter and blood flow in response to intracoronary acetylcholine stimulation at 3 months did not differ significantly from those at post-PCI (Figure 2B and supplemental Table II). Moreover, endothelium-independent vasodilatory response did not change from post-PCI to 3 months in either of the groups (supplemental Table II).

Coronary Blood-Flow Reserve
At 3 months, in the CPC group coronary flow reserve was found to be significantly increased by 43% (from 2.3±0.3 at begin to 3.3±0.5 at 3 months, P<0.05 versus post-PCI within the CPC group, P<0.05 versus control group at 3 months) but remained essentially unchanged in the control group (2.7±0.3 at post-PCI; 2.3±0.2 at 3 months) (Figure 3A). In the CPC group, patients with restenosis did not differ from those without restenosis with respect to CFR or endothelium-dependent vasomotion.

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. A, Coronary flow reserve in patients of the CPC (left) and the control group (right). Filled bars represent the beginning of the study (post-PCI); open bars, at 3 months. Coronary flow reserve significantly increases in the CPC-treated patients but remains constant in the control group. *P<0.05 vs post-PCI, #P<0.05 vs control group at 3 months. B, Number of hibernating segments in patients of the CPC (left) and the control group (right). Filled bars represent beginning of the study (post-PCI); open bars, at 3 months. The number of hibernating segments decreased in the CPC-treated patients and tends to increase in the control group during the study period. *P<0.05 vs post-PCI, #P<0.05 vs control group at 3 months.

Assessment of Myocardial Viability
At beginning of the study (post-PCI), patients in the CPC and the control group were characterized by a similar number of hibernating myocardial segments. At 3 months, the number of myocardial segments with hibernation was significantly reduced by 31% (from 2.9±0.6 segments post-PCI to 2.0±0.6 segments at 3 months; P<0.05 versus post-PCI within the CPC group; P<0.05 versus control group at 3 months), whereas no change was detectable in the control group (from 2.6±0.6 segments post-PCI to 3.6±0.6 segments at 3 months) (Figure 3B).

Assessment of Global LV-Function and Regional Wall Motion by MRI
Post PCI, patients in the CPC and the control group had similar end-diastolic and end-systolic LV volumes. Moreover, global LV function was found to be reduced by a similar degree in both groups. In the CPC group, the global LV-EF was significantly improved by 7.2% at 3 months (P<0.01 versus post-PCI; Figure 4), which was the result of an enhanced local wall motion in the target region. A representative MRI from a patient in the CPC group showing an improvement in local wall motion and global EF 3 months after intracoronary CPC application is shown in the online data supplement (Video Files 1 and 2).

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Individual changes in LV-EF. A, CPC group: individual changes in LV-EF from beginning of the study (post-PCI) to 3 months of follow-up. Bold lines and filled circles indicate patients with restenosis at the 3 months follow-up. The mean value±SEM for the LV-EF at post-PCI and at 3 months is depicted as well. The LV-EF is significantly increased in the CPC group 3 months after CPC application, independent of whether the patients developed a non–flow-limiting restenosis or not. *P<0.001 vs post-PCI, P<0.01 for the change (post-PCI vs 3 months) compared with the control group. B, Control group: intraindividual changes in LV-EF from beginning of the study (post-PCI) to 3 months of follow-up. Bold lines and filled circles indicate patient with restenosis at the 3 months follow-up. The mean value±SEM for the LV-EF at post-PCI and at 3 months is depicted as well. The LV-EF remains virtually unchanged in the control group.

Hence, the end-systolic LV volume decreased by 13% at 3 months (P<0.01 versus beginning), but end-diastolic LV volume remained unchanged. Moreover, the absolute volume of delayed enhancement, indicative of scar tissue, was found to be reduced 3 months after CPC infusion by 16% as compared with post-PCI (supplemental Table II). In the control group, global LV function, end-systolic, and end-diastolic LV volume, as well as the volume of delayed enhancement, remained unchanged (supplemental Table II).

	Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
In this first randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded study using intracoronary infusion of CPC, we are showing that intracoronary infusion of CPC after successful recanalization of CTO improves coronary endothelial function and augments metabolism in the target region in patients with symptomatic coronary atherosclerosis. These profound effects were coupled with an improvement in wall-motion abnormalities in the target area, a significant decrease in end-systolic volume and scar size resulting in an increase in global LV-EF. In conclusion, these data support the concept that intracoronary application of CPC after successful recanalization of CTO contributes to a recruitment of hibernating myocardium.

From these results, an important question arises: Is the primary mode of CPC action the improvement in endothelial function and vasculogenesis that leads to the recruitment of hibernating myocardium, or does endothelial function improve secondary to the CPC-mediated enhancement in metabolism and function? Clearly, both mechanisms are possible. The attenuated vasoconstriction of epicardial vessels in response to acetylcholine after CPC therapy might originate from the homing of locally administered CPC into gaps within the endothelial cell layer, thereby preventing the direct vasoconstrictive action of acetylcholine on the smooth muscle. This hypothesis is in accordance with data from animal and human studies proposing that a CPC-mediated reconstitution of damaged endothelium might result in an improvement of endothelium-dependent vasodilatation.^19,20 Because CPCs have also been shown to release survival factors, it is alternatively conceivable that those cytokines promote the survival and proliferation of resident endothelial cells within the epicardial coronary arteries.²¹ Additionally, the increase in the coronary flow reserve might be the consequence of an enhanced CPC-mediated vasculogenesis. The latter theory is supported by numerous, elegant animal studies proving the contribution of CPC and bone marrow–derived stem cells to neovascularization and linking them to the improvement in perfusion in ischemic tissues.^1–7 Even more evidence is currently being derived from human studies, in which the application of progenitor cells in reperfused acute myocardial infarction and the intramyocardial injection of bone marrow stem cells in patients with ischemic heart failure has been considered suitable for achievement of therapeutic angiogenesis that might contribute to an improvement in local and global LV function.^5,8–10

Nevertheless, the situation faced by CPCs that had been administered into the coronary circulation after successful recanalization of CTO is different: in case of prior myocardial infarction, the dead myocardium has already been replaced by scar tissue and remodeling of the left ventricle has started, which is possibly limiting the therapeutic benefits of an additional CPC application. Even in this hostile environment CPCs prevail: they did contribute to an improvement in metabolism, a reduction in infarct size, and an augmentation in EF. However, the question whether bone marrow–derived progenitor cells, including CPCs, and the progeny are competent to replace scar and rejuvenate damaged myocardium and whether this occurs by fusion or transdifferentiation is unanswered so far. Whereas earlier animal studies have suggested a regeneration of significant amounts of contractile myocardium consisting of newly formed endothelium, smooth muscle cells, and cardiomyocytes by intramyocardial injection of bone marrow stem cells,²² recent experiments question these results and the proposed mechanisms.^23–25 Nevertheless, because CPCs were recently shown to retrain the capability to differentiate into functional cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells, scar replacement by de novo generation of myocardium leading to an improvement in cardiac function cannot be excluded at this time.²⁶ Additionally, early tissue-committed stem cells, expressing cardiac and endothelial-lineage markers, which were recently recognized in the bone marrow and the circulating blood, might contribute to the reconstitution of functional myocardium in the present study.²⁷ There was a considerable variation in the percentage of CD34⁺ and CD133⁺ cells per patient. However, we did not detect any association between the number or percentage of stem cells or CPCs and the outcome with respect to endothelial function or hibernation. In our understanding, this finding is not surprising because the therapeutic effects of stem cells, of CPCs in particular, depend not only on their number but also on their functional capacities, which are known to be deteriorated by risk factors.²⁸

More recently, a population of so-called cardiac progenitor cells was identified in the heart of different mammals, including humans.^29,30 Those progenitors with stem cell properties were proven to contribute to the regeneration of functional myocardium after infarction as well.^28,29,31 It has been anticipated that intramyocardial or intracoronary administration of BMCs or CPCs might activate cardiac progenitor cells in a paracrine manner, thereby promoting cardiac repair. Therefore, it is conceivable that CPCs, which might represent a progeny of early-tissue committed stem cells, or paracrine-activated cardiac progenitor cells contribute to the replacement of scar tissue by functional myocardium. Moreover, it must be kept in mind that cytokines released from CPCs might contribute to the recruitment of immune cells, such as monocytes, macrophages, and lymphocytes.²⁸ These immune cells, which have a high activity of matrix metalloproteinases, will possibly replace surrounding scar tissue, thereby reducing the myocardial area with an hyperenhancement in MRI. Additionally, it is conceivable that CPCs, which are rich in proteases, transmigrate through the vessel wall and remove scar tissue by digestion.³² These latter 2 mechanisms could potentially explain the reduction in infarct size in the absence of significant cardiac regeneration. However, independent of whether a de novo generation of myocardium, rejuvenation of damaged myocardium (eg, by cell fusion), or improvement of endothelial function is a key mechanism of the CPC therapy, the majority clinical studies, including the present study, had an improvement in cardiac function in common, which is, from the point of view of the clinician, the most important finding.^22,23 Additionally, these finding in conjunction with the observed augmentation of myocardial perfusion and metabolism in the CPC-treated patients argues against concerns that CPC application might promote the growth of noncardiac tissue within the heart.³³

Lately, G-CSF stimulation to augment the number of CPCs has been discussed controversially; 1 study had been stopped prematurely because of an increased rate of in-stent restenosis in an inconsistent population of patients who had experienced myocardial infarction within the last 4 to 280 days.³⁴ In our present study, the binary rate of in-stent restenosis in the carefully selected control group compares favorable with results from previous trials assessing the effects of PCI and bare-metal stent implantation in patients with CTO, eg, GISSOC, STOP, and TOSCA, respectively.^35–37 Most importantly, after successful recanalization of CTO, G-CSF stimulation for 4 days followed by intracoronary CPCs application was not associated with an increased risk of in-stent restenosis or progression of coronary artery disease in our study. Notably, microcirculatory response was also improved in CPC-treated patients who demonstrated in-stent restenosis, and none of our patients experienced a worsening of local wall-motion or an expansion of the LV end-systolic volume after intracoronary CPC application, independent of whether an in-stent restenosis was present at follow-up or not.

The combined therapy with intracoronary transplantation of blood-derived progenitor cells after successful recanalization of chronic coronary occlusion was associated with a blunting of paradoxic vasoconstriction in the target region and an enhanced myocardial perfusion. The CPC-mediated rescue of hibernating myocardium resulted in an improvement in local wall motion and global LV function in the absence of any harmful short-term side effects. These data suggest that intracoronary transplantation of progenitor cells, in addition to standard therapy, not only has the potential to improve recovery after acute myocardial infarction but might also partially retrieve the deleterious effects of chronic coronary occlusion on LV remodeling.

	Acknowledgments

 
This study was supported by Heart Center Leipzig GmbH, University of Leipzig.

	Footnotes

 
Original received April 22, 2005; revision received August 2, 2005; accepted August 31, 2005.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 

1. Asahara T, Murohara T, Sullivan A, Silver M, van der Zee R, Li T, Witzenbichler B, Schatteman G, Isner JM. Isolation of putative progenitor endothelial cells for angiogenesis. Science. 1997; 275: 964–967.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Takahashi T, Kalka C, Masuda H, Chen D, Silver M, Kearney M, Magner M, Isner JM, Asahara T. Ischemia- and cytokine-induced mobilization of bone marrow-derived endothelial progenitor cells for neovascularization. Nat Med. 1999; 5: 434–438.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Rafii S, Lyden D. Therapeutic stem and progenitor cell transplantation for organ vascularization and regeneration. Nat Med. 2003; 9: 702–712.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Kocher AA, Schuster MD, Szabolcs MJ, Takuma S, Burkhoff D, Wang J, Homma S, Edwards NM, Itescu S. Neovascularization of ischemic myocardium by human bone-marrow-derived angioblasts prevents cardiomyocyte apoptosis, reduces remodeling and improves cardiac function. Nat Med. 2001; 7: 430–436.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5. Perin EC, Dohmann HF, Borojevic R, Silva SA, Sousa AL, Mesquita CT, Rossi MI, Carvalho AC, Dutra HS, Dohmann HJ, Silva GV, Belem L, Vivacqua R, Rangel FO, Esporcatte R, Geng YJ, Vaughn WK, Assad JA, Mesquita ET, Willerson JT. Transendocardial, autologous bone marrow cell transplantation for severe, chronic ischemic heart failure. Circulation. 2003; 107: 2294–2302.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Yeh ET, Zhang S, Wu HD, Korbling M, Willerson JT, Estrov Z. Transdifferentiation of human peripheral blood CD34+-enriched cell population into cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells, and smooth muscle cells in vivo. Circulation. 2003; 108: 2070–2073.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Zhang S, Wang D, Estrov Z, Raj S, Willerson JT, Yeh ET. Both cell fusion and transdifferentiation account for the transformation of human peripheral blood CD34-positive cells into cardiomyocytes in vivo. Circulation. 2004; 110: 3803–3807.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Strauer BE, Brehm M, Zeus T, Kostering M, Hernandez A, Sorg RV, Kogler G, Wernet P. Repair of infarcted myocardium by autologous intracoronary mononuclear bone marrow cell transplantation in humans. Circulation. 2002; 106: 1913–1918.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Assmus B, Schachinger V, Teupe C, Britten M, Lehmann R, Dobert N, Grunwald F, Aicher A, Urbich C, Martin H, Hoelzer D, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM. Transplantation of Progenitor Cells and Regeneration Enhancement in Acute Myocardial Infarction (TOPCARE-AMI). Circulation. 2002; 106: 3009–3017.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Wollert KC, Meyer GP, Lotz J, Ringes-Lichtenberg S, Lippolt P, Breidenbach C, Fichtner S, Korte T, Hornig B, Messinger D, Arseniev L, Hertenstein B, Ganser A, Drexler H. Intracoronary autologous bone-marrow cell transfer after myocardial infarction: the BOOST randomised controlled clinical trial. Lancet. 2004; 364: 141–148.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Wijns W, Vatner SF, Camici PG. Hibernating myocardium. N Engl J Med. 1998; 339: 173–181.[Free Full Text]
12. Olivari Z, Rubartelli P, Piscione F, Ettori F, Fontanelli A, Salemme L, Giachero C, Di Mario C, Gabrielli G, Spedicato L, Bedogni F. Immediate results and one-year clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary interventions in chronic total occlusions: data from a multicenter, prospective, observational study (TOAST-GISE). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41: 1672–1678.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Adams V, Lenk K, Linke A, Lenz D, Erbs S, Sandri M, Tarnok A, Gielen S, Emmrich F, Schuler G, Hambrecht R. Increase of circulating endothelial progenitor cells in patients with coronary artery disease after exercise-induced ischemia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004; 24: 684–690.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Hambrecht R, Wolf A, Gielen S, Linke A, Hofer J, Erbs S, Schoene N, Schuler G. Effect of exercise on coronary endothelial function in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 454–460.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Dobert N, Britten M, Assmus B, Berner U, Menzel C, Lehmann R, Hamscho N, Schachinger V, Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, Grunwald F. Transplantation of progenitor cells after reperfused acute myocardial infarction: evaluation of perfusion and myocardial viability with FDG-PET and thallium SPECT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004; 31: 1146–1151.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Kuhl HP, Beek AM, van der Weerdt AP, Hofman MB, Visser CA, Lammertsma AA, Heussen N, Visser FC, van Rossum AC. Myocardial viability in chronic ischemic heart disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41: 1341–1348.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Thiele H, Paetsch I, Schnackenburg B, Bornstedt A, Grebe O, Wellnhofer E, Schuler G, Fleck E, Nagel E. Improved accuracy of quantitative assessment of left ventricular volume and ejection fraction by geometric models with steady-state free precession. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2002; 4: 327–339.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, Pennell DJ, Rumberger JA, Ryan T, Verani MS. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2002; 105: 539–542.[Free Full Text]
19. Werner N, Junk S, Laufs U, Link A, Walenta K, Bohm M, Nickenig G. Intravenous transfusion of endothelial progenitor cells reduces neointima formation after vascular injury. Circ Res. 2003; 93: e17–e24.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20. Higashi Y, Kimura M, Hara K, Noma K, Jitsuiki D, Nakagawa K, Oshima T, Chayama K, Sueda T, Goto C, Matsubara H, Murohara T, Yoshizumi M. Autologous bone-marrow mononuclear cell implantation improves endothelium-dependent vasodilation in patients with limb ischemia. Circulation. 2004; 109: 1215–1218.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Rehman J, Li J, Orschell CM, March KL. Peripheral blood "endothelial progenitor cells" are derived from monocyte/macrophages and secrete angiogenic growth factors. Circulation. 2003; 107: 1164–1169.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Orlic D, Kajstura J, Chimenti S, Jakoniuk I, Anderson SM, Li B, Pickel J, McKay R, Nadal-Ginard B, Bodine DM, Leri A, Anversa P. Bone marrow cells regenerate infarcted myocardium. Nature. 2001; 410: 701–705.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Murry CE, Soonpaa MH, Reinecke H, Nakajima H, Nakajima HO, Rubart M, Pasumarthi KB, Virag JI, Bartelmez SH, Poppa V, Bradford G, Dowell JD, Williams DA, Field LJ. Haematopoietic stem cells do not transdifferentiate into cardiac myocytes in myocardial infarcts. Nature. 2004; 428: 664–668.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24. Chien KR. Stem cells: lost in translation. Nature. 2004; 428: 607–608.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25. Nygren JM, Jovinge S, Breitbach M, Sawen P, Roll W, Hescheler J, Taneera J, Fleischmann BK, Jacobsen SE. Bone marrow-derived hematopoietic cells generate cardiomyocytes at a low frequency through cell fusion, but not transdifferentiation. Nat Med. 2004; 10: 494–501.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Badorff C, Brandes RP, Popp R, Rupp S, Urbich C, Aicher A, Fleming I, Busse R, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. Transdifferentiation of blood-derived human adult endothelial progenitor cells into functionally active cardiomyocytes. Circulation. 2003; 107: 1024–1032.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Kucia M, Dawn B, Hunt G, Guo Y, Wysoczynski M, Majka M, Ratajczak J, Rezzoug F, Ildstad ST, Bolli R, Ratajczak MZ. Cells expressing early cardiac markers reside in the bone marrow and are mobilized into the peripheral blood after myocardial infarction. Circ Res. 2004; 95: 1191–1199.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Dimmeler S, Zeiher AM, Schneider MD. Unchain my heart: the scientific foundations of cardiac repair. J Clin Invest. 2005; 115: 572–583.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Beltrami AP, Barlucchi L, Torella D, Baker M, Limana F, Chimenti S, Kasahara H, Rota M, Musso E, Urbanek K, Leri A, Kajstura J, Nadal-Ginard B, Anversa P. Adult cardiac stem cells are multipotent and support myocardial regeneration. Cell. 2003; 114: 763–776.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
30. Chimenti C, Kajstura J, Torella D, Urbanek K, Heleniak H, Colussi C, Di Meglio F, Nadal-Ginard B, Frustaci A, Leri A, Maseri A, Anversa P. Senescence and death of primitive cells and myocytes lead to premature cardiac aging and heart failure. Circ Res. 2003; 93: 604–613.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Linke A, Muller P, Nurzynska D, Casarsa C, Torella D, Nascimbene A, Castaldo C, Cascapera S, Bohm M, Quaini F, Urbanek K, Leri A, Hintze TH, Kajstura J, Anversa P. Stem cells in the dog heart are self-renewing, clonogenic, and multipotent and regenerate infarcted myocardium, improving cardiac function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102: 8966–8971.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Urbich C, Heeschen C, Aicher A, Sasaki K, Bruhl T, Farhadi MR, Vajkoczy P, Hofmann WK, Peters C, Pennacchio LA, Abolmaali ND, Chavakis E, Reinheckel T, Zeiher AM, Dimmeler S. Cathepsin L is required for endothelial progenitor cell-induced neovascularization. Nat Med. 2005; 11: 206–213.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. Yoon YS, Park JS, Tkebuchava T, Luedeman C, Losordo DW. Unexpected severe calcification after transplantation of bone marrow cells in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2004; 109: 3154–3157.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Kang HJ, Kim HS, Zhang SY, Park KW, Cho HJ, Koo BK, Kim YJ, Soo Lee D, Sohn DW, Han KS, Oh BH, Lee MM, Park YB. Effects of intracoronary infusion of peripheral blood stem-cells mobilised with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor on left ventricular systolic function and restenosis after coronary stenting in myocardial infarction: the MAGIC cell randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2004; 363: 751–756.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. Buller CE, Dzavik V, Carere RG, Mancini GB, Barbeau G, Lazzam C, Anderson TJ, Knudtson ML, Marquis JF, Suzuki T, Cohen EA, Fox RS, Teo KK. Primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in occluded coronary arteries: the Total Occlusion Study of Canada (TOSCA). Circulation. 1999; 100: 236–242.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Rubartelli P, Niccoli L, Verna E, Giachero C, Zimarino M, Fontanelli A, Vassanelli C, Campolo L, Martuscelli E, Tommasini G. Stent implantation versus balloon angioplasty in chronic coronary occlusions: results from the GISSOC trial. Gruppo Italiano di Studio sullo Stent nelle Occlusioni Coronariche. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 32: 90–96.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Lotan C, Rozenman Y, Hendler A, Turgeman Y, Ayzenberg O, Beyar R, Krakover R, Rosenfeld T, Gotsman MS. Stents in total occlusion for restenosis prevention. The multicentre randomized STOP study. The Israeli Working Group for Interventional Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2000; 21: 1960–1966.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Related Article:

Blood-Derived Progenitor Cells After Recanalization of Chronic Coronary Artery Occlusions in Humans

James T. Willerson, Edward T.H. Yeh, Yong-Jian Geng, and Emerson C. Perin
Circ. Res. 2005 97: 735-736. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. R. Pries, H. Habazettl, G. Ambrosio, P. R. Hansen, J. C. Kaski, V. Schachinger, H. Tillmanns, G. Vassalli, I. Tritto, M. Weis, et al. A review of methods for assessment of coronary microvascular disease in both clinical and experimental settings Cardiovasc Res, June 25, 2008; (2008) cvn136v2. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Tayyareci, M. Sezer, B. Umman, S. Besisik, A. Mudun, Y. Sanli, A. Oncul, N. Gurses, D. Sargin, M. Meric, et al. Intracoronary Autologous Bone Marrow-Derived Mononuclear Cell Transplantation Improves Coronary Collateral Vessel Formation and Recruitment Capacity in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: A Combined Hemodynamic and Scintigraphic Approach Angiology, May 1, 2008; 59(2): 145 - 155. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Kendziorra, H. Barthel, S. Erbs, F. Emmrich, R. Hambrecht, G. Schuler, O. Sabri, and R. Kluge Effect of Progenitor Cells on Myocardial Perfusion and Metabolism in Patients After Recanalization of a Chronically Occluded Coronary Artery J. Nucl. Med., April 1, 2008; 49(4): 557 - 563. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. K. Courtney, N. R. Munce, K. J. Anderson, A. S. Thind, G. Leung, P. E. Radau, F. S. Foster, I. A. Vitkin, R. S. Schwartz, A. J. Dick, et al. Innovations in imaging for chronic total occlusions: a glimpse into the future of angiography's blind-spot Eur. Heart J., March 1, 2008; 29(5): 583 - 593. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. K. Burt, Y. Loh, W. Pearce, N. Beohar, W. G. Barr, R. Craig, Y. Wen, J. A. Rapp, and J. Kessler Clinical Applications of Blood-Derived and Marrow-Derived Stem Cells for Nonmalignant Diseases JAMA, February 27, 2008; 299(8): 925 - 936. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Erbs, A. Linke, V. Schachinger, B. Assmus, H. Thiele, K.-W. Diederich, C. Hoffmann, S. Dimmeler, T. Tonn, R. Hambrecht, et al. Restoration of Microvascular Function in the Infarct-Related Artery by Intracoronary Transplantation of Bone Marrow Progenitor Cells in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The Doppler Substudy of the Reinfusion of Enriched Progenitor Cells and Infarct Remodeling in Acute Myocardial Infarction (REPAIR-AMI) Trial Circulation, July 24, 2007; 116(4): 366 - 374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Abdel-Latif, R. Bolli, I. M. Tleyjeh, V. M. Montori, E. C. Perin, C. A. Hornung, E. K. Zuba-Surma, M. Al-Mallah, and B. Dawn Adult Bone Marrow-Derived Cells for Cardiac Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Arch Intern Med, May 28, 2007; 167(10): 989 - 997. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L.M.A. Beeres, F. M. Bengel, J. Bartunek, D. E. Atsma, J. M. Hill, M. Vanderheyden, M. Penicka, M. J. Schalij, W. Wijns, and J. J. Bax Role of Imaging in Cardiac Stem Cell Therapy J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 20, 2007; 49(11): 1137 - 1148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. L. Sanchez, A. Villa, J. A. San Roman, T. Cantero, M. E. Fernandez, and F. Fernandez-Aviles Percutaneous bone-marrow-derived cell transplantation: clinical observations Eur. Heart J. Suppl., December 1, 2006; 8(suppl_H): H23 - H31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Honold, R. Lehmann, C. Heeschen, D. H. Walter, B. Assmus, K.-I. Sasaki, H. Martin, J. Haendeler, A. M. Zeiher, and S. Dimmeler Effects of Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor on Functional Activities of Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Patients With Chronic Ischemic Heart Disease Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., October 1, 2006; 26(10): 2238 - 2243. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. J. Boyle, S. P. Schulman, and J. M. Hare Stem Cell Therapy for Cardiac Repair: Ready for the Next Step Circulation, July 25, 2006; 114(4): 339 - 352. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-J. Kang, H.-Y. Lee, S.-H. Na, S.-A Chang, K.-W. Park, H.-K. Kim, S.-Y. Kim, H.-J. Chang, W. Lee, W. J. Kang, et al. Differential Effect of Intracoronary Infusion of Mobilized Peripheral Blood Stem Cells by Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor on Left Ventricular Function and Remodeling in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Versus Old Myocardial Infarction: The MAGIC Cell-3-DES Randomized, Controlled Trial Circulation, July 4, 2006; 114(1_suppl): I-145 - I-151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Erbs, A. Linke, G. Schuler, and R. Hambrecht Intracoronary Administration of Circulating Blood-Derived Progenitor Cells After Recanalization of Chronic Coronary Artery Occlusion Improves Endothelial Function Circ. Res., March 17, 2006; 98(5): e48 - e48. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. H. Traverse CPCs as Treatment for Chronic Total Coronary Artery Occlusions Circ. Res., January 6, 2006; 98(1): e1 - e1. [Full Text] [PDF]

J. T. Willerson, E. T.H. Yeh, Y.-J. Geng, and E. C.