This meta-analysis and systematic review compiles comparative data from 2004 to 2024, investigating the safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) derived from various tissues for the treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and associated heart failure. In addition, this review highlights the limitations of these interventions and provides valuable insights for future therapeutic approaches. Relevant articles were retrieved from the PubMed® database using targeted keywords. Our inclusion criteria included clinical trials with patients over 18 years of age, case reports and pilot studies. Animal experiments, in vitro studies, correlational and longitudinal studies, and study designs and protocols were excluded. Forty-nine original articles resulted in follow-up reports of 45 trials. MSCs from bone marrow, umbilical cord and adipose tissue were moderately well tolerated. Of the 1408 participants who received MSCs, 33 trials (67.3%) reported the occurrence of death or serious adverse events. These events resulted in 80 deaths (52% of reported cases) following MSC administration. Importantly, 41.3% of these deaths (n = 33) were not considered to be related to the intervention itself, while 40% of these deaths had no reported cause. As the primary outcome, the mean increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline was 5.75% (95% CI: 3.38% -8.11%, p < 0.0001, I2 = 90,9%) in the randomized controlled trials only (n = 24) within the treatment groups and 3.19% (95% CI: 1.63% to 4.75%, p < 0.0001, I2 = 74,17%) in the control groups after the intervention. When the above results were compared using the standardized mean difference (SDM), a significance in favor of the treatment group was also found (SDM = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.19-0.64, p < 0.001, I2 = 71%). Although improvements were also seen in the control groups, 33.3% (n = 15) of the studies showed no significant difference between the control and treatment groups. The 6-minute walking test (6MWT) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class scores, used for assessing exercise tolerance and quality of life (QoL), respectively, further supported the improvements in the treatment group. These improvements were noted as 62.5% (n = 10) for the 6MWT and 54.5% (n = 12) for the NYHA class scores. According to the risk of bias analysis, 4 trials were of good quality (11.8%), 15 were of fair quality (44.1%), and 15 were of poor quality (44.1%). Major limitations of these studies included small sample size, diagnostic challenges/lack, uncertain cell dosage and potential bias in patient selection. Despite the ongoing debate surrounding cell administration for ICM, there are supporting signs of improved clinical and laboratory outcomes, as well as improved QoL in the MSC-treated groups. However, it is important to recognize the limitations of each study, highlighting the need for larger, controlled trials to validate these findings.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF), a global health challenge, requires innovative diagnostic and management approaches. The rapid evolution of deep learning (DL) in healthcare necessitates a comprehensive review to evaluate these developments and their potential to enhance HF evaluation, aligning clinical practices with technological advancements.
OBJECTIVE: This review aims to systematically explore the contributions of DL technologies in the assessment of HF, focusing on their potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, personalize treatment strategies, and address the impact of comorbidities.
METHODS: A thorough literature search was conducted across four major electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and IEEE Xplore, yielding 137 articles that were subsequently categorized into five primary application areas: cardiovascular disease (CVD) classification, HF detection, image analysis, risk assessment, and other clinical analyses. The selection criteria focused on studies utilizing DL algorithms for HF assessment, not limited to HF detection but extending to any attempt in analyzing and interpreting HF-related data.
RESULTS: The analysis revealed a notable emphasis on CVD classification and HF detection, with DL algorithms showing significant promise in distinguishing between affected individuals and healthy subjects. Furthermore, the review highlights DL\'s capacity to identify underlying cardiomyopathies and other comorbidities, underscoring its utility in refining diagnostic processes and tailoring treatment plans to individual patient needs.
CONCLUSIONS: This review establishes DL as a key innovation in HF management, highlighting its role in advancing diagnostic accuracy and personalized care. The insights provided advocate for the integration of DL in clinical settings and suggest directions for future research to enhance patient outcomes in HF care.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial viability assessment is used to select patients who will derive the greatest benefit from revascularization. It remains controversial whether revascularization only benefits patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who have viable myocardium. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare mortality between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and non-viable myocardium who underwent revascularization and those who underwent medical therapy alone.
METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched using PubMed to retrieve studies published up to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were 1. studies that evaluated the impact of revascularization (revascularization group) versus medical therapy alone (control group) following myocardial viability assessment; 2. patients who had coronary artery disease that was amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention; and 3. patients who had non-viable myocardium. The main outcome measure was all-cause mortality.
RESULTS: A total of 12 studies were included, evaluating 1363 patients with non-viable myocardium, of whom 501 patients underwent revascularization and 862 patients received medical therapy alone. There was a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.62-0.93, I2 = 0) in the revascularization group compared to the control group. There was no association between the type of viability imaging modality and the risk of all-cause mortality (P-interaction = 0.58).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest a benefit from revascularization compared to medical therapy in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy despite the lack of myocardial viability.

Background: Ischemic cardiomyopathies are the leading causes of mortality and morbidity. Stem cell therapy using amniotic membrane mesenchymal stem cells have emerged as a promising cardiac regeneration modality. They have shown great immunological advantage when used in allogeneic or xenogeneic transplantation. The aim of the current study is to accumulate evidence from published preclinical studies on the application of amniotic membrane derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs) in the treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathies including myocardial ischemia and heart failure. The aim is to define if there is enough high-quality current evidence to support starting the use of these cells in clinical trials. Methods: PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched without temporal and language restrictions. Data were extracted from selected studies. The primary outcomes were left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LV fibrosis. The risk of bias (ROB) assessment was performed using SYRCLE\'s ROB tool. After qualitative synthesis, provided that data meets the criteria for quantitative analysis, a meta-analysis was performed using Stata software V12 to investigate the heterogeneity of the data and to get an overall estimate of the effect size of the treatment on each outcome. Results: On primary search, 438 citations were retrieved. After screening, three studies were selected for quantitative analysis of each of the outcomes LVEF and LV fibrosis. Their administration in acute and chronic MI alleviates heart failure and improves LVEF (SMD=3.56, 95% CI: 2.24-4.87, I-squared=83.1%, p=0.003) and reduces infarct size (SMD= -4.41, 95% CI: (-5.68)-(-3.14), I-squared=79.0%, p=0.009). These observations were achieved in the acute MI model, HF following ischemia due to coronary artery stenosis and coronary artery occlusion with the early restoration of the perfusion. Conclusion: Present low and medium quality evidence from preclinical studies confirm the efficacy of the AMSCs in the preclinical models of acute MI and HF following ischemia due to coronary artery stenosis and permanent/temporary coronary artery occlusion. High-quality preclinical studies are indicated to bridge the gaps in translation of the current findings of AMSCs research for the treatment of patients with acute and chronic myocardial ischemia and heart failure.

Negative left ventricular (LV) remodeling consequent to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is characterized by an increase in LV volumes in the presence of a depressed LVEF. In order to restore the shape, size, and function of the LV, operative treatment options to achieve volume reduction and shape reconstruction should be considered. In the past decade, conventional surgical LV reconstruction through a full median sternotomy has evolved towards a hybrid transcatheter and less invasive LV reconstruction. In order to perform a safe and effective hybrid LV reconstruction, thorough knowledge of the technical considerations and adequate use of multimodality imaging both pre- and intraoperatively are fundamental. In addition, a comprehensive understanding of the individual procedural steps from both a cardiological and surgical point of view is required.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter ablation is an effective strategy for drug-refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT) in ischemic cardiomyopathy. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes of prophylactic catheter ablation (PCA) of Ventricular Tachycardia (VT) in ischemic cardiomyopathy patients.
METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search through February 10, 2020, for all eligible randomized controlled trials that compared \"PCA\" versus \"No PCA\" for VT. Primary efficacy outcomes included - appropriate ICD therapy (composite of anti-tachycardia pacing and ICD shock), appropriate ICD shocks, electrical storm, cardiac mortality, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was any adverse events.
RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials (N = 505) met inclusion criteria. Prophylactic catheter ablation was associated significant reduction in appropriate ICD therapies (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.55 - 0.89, p = 0.004), appropriate ICD shocks (RR 0.57 95% CI 0.40 - 0.80, p = 0.001) with a trend towards reduced risk of electrical storm (RR 0.64; CI 0.39 - 1.05; p = 0.075) compared to \"No PCA\". There was no significant difference in cardiac mortality (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.31 - 1.43, p = 0.29) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.52 - 1.82, p = 0.94) with similar adverse events (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.73 - 2.95, p = 0.29) between two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic catheter ablation in ischemic cardiomyopathy patients was associated with a lower risk of ICD therapies, including ICD shocks and VT storm with no difference in cardiac and all-cause mortality.

Ischemic cardiomyopathy results from the combination of scar with fibrosis replacement and areas of dysfunctional but viable myocardium that may improve contractile function with revascularization. Observational studies reported that only patients with substantial amounts of myocardial viability had better outcomes following surgical revascularization. Accordingly, dedicated noninvasive techniques have evolved to quantify viable myocardium with the objective of selecting patients for this form of therapeutic intervention. However, prospective trials have not confirmed the interaction between myocardial viability and the treatment effect of revascularization. Furthermore, recent observations indicate that recovery of left ventricular function is not the principal mechanism by which surgical revascularization improves prognosis. In this paper, the authors describe a more contemporary application of viability testing that is founded on the alternative concept that the main goal of surgical revascularization is to prevent further damage by protecting the residual viable myocardium from subsequent acute coronary events.

This review summarizes the results of clinical trials of cell therapy in patients with heart failure (HF). In contrast to acute myocardial infarction (where results have been consistently negative for more than a decade), in the setting of HF the results of Phase I-II trials are encouraging, both in ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Several well-designed Phase II studies have met their primary endpoint and demonstrated an efficacy signal, which is remarkable considering that only one dose of cells was used. That an efficacy signal was seen 6-12 months after a single treatment provides a rationale for larger, rigorous trials. Importantly, no safety concerns have emerged. Amongst the various cell types tested, mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) derived from bone marrow, umbilical cord, or adipose tissue show the greatest promise. In contrast, embryonic stem cells are not likely to become a clinical therapy. Unfractionated bone marrow cells and cardiosphere-derived cells have been abandoned. The cell products used for HF will most likely be allogeneic. New approaches, such as repeated cell treatment and intravenous delivery, may revolutionize the field. As is the case for most new therapies, the development of cell therapies for HF has been slow, plagued by multifarious problems, and punctuated by many setbacks; at present, the utility of cell therapy in HF remains to be determined. What the field needs is rigorous, well-designed Phase III trials. The most important things to move forward are to keep an open mind, avoid preconceived notions, and let ourselves be guided by the evidence.

Myocardial pathologies are significant causes of morbidity and mortality in patients worldwide. Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies have become a worldwide epidemic of the 21st century with an increasing impact on health care systems. The 2012 European Society of Cardiology and 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association guidelines provide current therapy guidance to reduce mortality and morbidity.
This was a systematic review involving cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) studies for the diagnosis of cardiomyopathy from January 2013 to April 2017. Out of 62 reviewed studies, only 12 were included in our study.
The average sensitivity and specificity of CMR in the diagnosis of cardiomyopathy was 86.75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.30% to 92.58%) and 81.75% (95% CI, 73.0% to 87.6%), respectively, and the positive predictive and negative predictive values were 80.17% and 86.75%, respectively.
Despite some limitations, our study shows that CMR has high sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value in diagnosing different types of cardiomyopathy. CMR may be used to differentiate types of cardiomyopathy, accurately quantify the chamber dimensions, volumes, and cardiac function, which make it useful for prognosis as well.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial pathologies are significant causes of morbidity and mortality in patients worldwide. Ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies have become a worldwide epidemic of the 21st century with an increasing impact on health care systems. The 2012 European Society of Cardiology and 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association guidelines provide current therapy guidance to reduce mortality and morbidity.
METHODS: This was a systematic review involving cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) studies for the diagnosis of cardiomyopathy from January 2013 to April 2017. Out of 62 reviewed studies, only 12 were included in our study.
RESULTS: The average sensitivity and specificity of CMR in the diagnosis of cardiomyopathy was 86.75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70.30% to 92.58%) and 81.75% (95% CI, 73.0% to 87.6%), respectively, and the positive predictive and negative predictive values were 80.17% and 86.75%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite some limitations, our study shows that CMR has high sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value in diagnosing different types of cardiomyopathy. CMR may be used to differentiate types of cardiomyopathy, accurately quantify the chamber dimensions, volumes, and cardiac function, which make it useful for prognosis as well.