↓ Skip to main content

Amniotic Fluid-Derived Stem Cells Demonstrated Cardiogenic Potential in Indirect Co-culture with Human Cardiac Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Biomedical Engineering, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Amniotic Fluid-Derived Stem Cells Demonstrated Cardiogenic Potential in Indirect Co-culture with Human Cardiac Cells
Published in
Annals of Biomedical Engineering, September 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10439-014-1114-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yang Gao, Jennifer Petsche Connell, Lalita Wadhwa, Rodrigo Ruano, Jeffrey G. Jacot

Abstract

Amniotic fluid-derived stem cells (AFSC) have been shown to be broadly multipotent and non-tumorogenic. Previous studies of direct mixing of AFSC and neonatal rat ventricle myocytes indicated evidence of AFSC cardiogenesis. In this study, we examined human AFSC cardiogenic potential in indirect co-culture with human cardiac cells in conditions that eliminated the possibility of cell fusion. Human AFSC in contact with human cardiac cells showed expression of cardiac troponin T (cTnT) in immunohistochemistry, and no evidence of cell fusion was found through fluorescent in situ hybridization. When indirectly co-cultured with cardiac cells, human AFSC in contact with cardiac cells across a thin porous membrane showed a statistically significant increase in cTnT expression compared to non-contact conditions but lacked upregulation of calcium modulating proteins and did not have functional or morphological characteristics of mature cardiomyocytes. This suggests that contact is a necessary but not sufficient condition for AFSC cardiac differentiation in co-culture with cardiac cells.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Researcher 4 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 25%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 25%
Unspecified 2 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Materials Science 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 October 2014.
All research outputs
#9,894,082
of 12,356,791 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Biomedical Engineering
#1,025
of 1,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,007
of 216,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Biomedical Engineering
#23
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,356,791 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 216,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.