Safety and efficacy of platelet-derived mitochondrial transplantation in ischaemic heart disease

Fatemeh Baharvand,Mehryar Habibi Roudkenar,Zahra Pourmohammadi-Bejarpasi,Nima Najafi-Ghalehlou,Alireza Feizkhah,Somaye Bashiri Aliabadi,Arsalan Salari,Amaneh Mohammadi Roushandeh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132227
2024-09-01
Abstract:Background: Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a globally significant health challenge in spite of improvement in management strategy. Being aware that mitochondrial dysfunction plays a crucial role in ischaemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) modulation, empirical evidence suggests functional mitochondrial transplantation strikes as a reliable therapeutic approach for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Methods and results: We conducted a prospective, triple-blinded, parallel-group, blocked randomised clinical trial to investigate the therapeutic effects and clinical outcomes of platelet-derived mitochondrial transplantation in 30 patients with acute STEMI, such that the 15 subjects in the control group were given standard of care treatment, whereas the subjects in the intervention group received autologous platelet-derived mitochondria through the intracoronary injection. We observed that within 40 days, the intervention group had a slightly greater improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) compared to the control group and experienced a significant enhancement in the exercise capacity (p < 0.001). Moreover, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), arrhythmia, fever, and tachycardia were compared between the groups and lack of significant difference marks the safety of mitochondrial transplantation (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the two groups were not significantly distinct as regards the average length of stay for a hospitalisation (p > 0.05). Conclusion: We suggest platelet-derived mitochondrial transplantation appears as a beneficial and highly promising therapeutic option for patients of ischaemic heart disease (IHD); however, we are aware that further in-depth studies with larger sample sizes along with longer follow-up periods are necessary for validating the clinical implications of our findings.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?