Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 991

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intracoronary Bone Marrow Cell Transfer After Myocardial Infarction: Eighteen Months’ Follow-Up Data From the Randomized, Controlled BOOST (BOne marrOw transfer to enhance ST-elevation infarct regeneration) Trial

Meyer, Gerd P., Wollert, Kai C., Lotz, Joachim, Steffens, Jan, Lippolt, Peter, Fichtner, Stephanie, Hecker, Hartmut, Schaefer, Arnd, Arseniev, Lubomir, Hertenstein, Bernd, Ganser, Arnold, Drexler, Helmut·2006·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Intracoronary transfer of autologous bone marrow cells (BMCs) may enhance recovery of left ventricular (LV) function in patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, clinical studies addressing the effects of BMCs after AMI have covered only limited time frames ranging from 3 to 6 months. The critical question of whether BMC transfer can have a sustained impact on LV function remains unanswered. Methods and Results– After percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) of the infarct-related artery, 60 patients were randomized 1:1 to a control group with optimal postinfarction therapy and a BMC transfer group that also received an intracoronary BMC infusion 4.8±1.3 days after PCI. Cardiac MRI was performed 3.5±1.5 days, 6±1 months, and 18±6 months after PCI. BMC transfer was not associated with adverse clinical events. In the control group, mean global LV ejection fraction increased by 0.7 and 3.1 percentage points after 6 and 18 months, respectively. LV ejection fraction in the BMC transfer group increased by 6.7 and 5.9 percentage points. The difference in LVEF improvement between groups was significant after 6 months but not after 18 months ( P =0.27). The speed of LV ejection fraction recovery over the course of 18 months was significantly higher in the BMC transfer group ( P =0.001). Conclusions– In this study, a single dose of intracoronary BMCs did not provide long-term benefit on LV systolic function after AMI compared with a randomized control group; however, the study suggests an acceleration of LV ejection fraction recovery after AMI by BMC therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.105.575118

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Cited by

See all 991

Metadata

Authors
Meyer, G. P., Wollert, K. C., Lotz, J., Steffens, J., Lippolt, P., Fichtner, S., Hecker, H., Schaefer, A., Arseniev, L., Hertenstein, B., Ganser, A., & Drexler, H.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2006-03-14
Volume
113
Issue
10
Pages
1287-1294
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2167595513
Cited by
991
References
28
FWCI
59.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intracoronary Bone Marrow Cell Transfer After Myocardial Infarction: Eighteen Months’ Follow-Up Data From the Randomized, Controlled BOOST (BOne marrOw transfer to enhance ST-elevation infarct regeneration) Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.105.575118
The paper
Meyer, G. P., Wollert, K. C., Lotz, J., Steffens, J., Lippolt, P., Fichtner, S., Hecker, H., Schaefer, A., Arseniev, L., Hertenstein, B., Ganser, A., & Drexler, H. (2006). Intracoronary Bone Marrow Cell Transfer After Myocardial Infarction: Eighteen Months’ Follow-Up Data From the Randomized, Controlled BOOST (BOne marrOw transfer to enhance ST-elevation infarct regeneration) Trial. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.575118

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.