Cell therapy for acute myocardial infarction: Requiescat in Pace
Assessed by RV013 · Clinical Chair in Health Services Research
Assessed on 10 Nov 2025
OverallReviewer's overall integrity assessment, derived from all research questions Serious concerns
DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa802 (opens in new tab)
Resource ripekg:research-integrity-assessment/RIPEAEFF3EFFF7777967A
5 Research Questions · 7 Evidence Items
Q1.1 — Does the study have an associated retraction?
Rationale: Checked journal page, no retraction. Wrong doi extracted above, notice posted.
Q1.2 — Does the study have an associated expression of concern or other relevant post-publication notice?
Rationale: Agree, no notices on journal page or PubPeer - checked correct doi.
Q1.3 — Do other studies by the research team highlight causes for concern?
Rationale: Agree
Supporting Evidence (5)
Retraction NoticeSource: Retraction Watch database
Growth Properties of Cardiac Stem Cells Are a Novel Biomarker of Patients’ Outcome After Coronary Bypass Surgery
10.1161/cir.0000000000000341 (opens in new tab)RetractionWatch ID:Record identifier in the Retraction Watch database 11316
Rationale: Conflict of Interest
About Author: Filippo Crea
Retraction NoticeSource: Retraction Watch database
Growth Properties of Cardiac Stem Cells Are a Novel Biomarker of Patients’ Outcome After Coronary Bypass Surgery
10.1161/cir.0000000000000092 (opens in new tab)RetractionWatch ID:Record identifier in the Retraction Watch database 11317
Rationale: Error in Image;Investigation by Journal/Publisher
About Author: Filippo Crea
Retraction NoticeSource: Retraction Watch database
Response to Letter Regarding Article, “Growth Properties of Cardiac Stem Cells Are a Novel Biomarker of Patients’ Outcome After Coronary Bypass Surgery”
10.1161/cir.0000000000000342 (opens in new tab)RetractionWatch ID:Record identifier in the Retraction Watch database 13664
Rationale: Conflict of Interest;Error in Text;Investigation by Company/Institution
About Author: Filippo Crea
Q2.2 — Are there concerns relating to the timing or absence of study registration?
Rationale: Registration EudraCT No: 2012-001495-11 given in online appendix. Registered 2013-03-04, so prospective.
Supporting Evidence (2)
Clinical Trial RegistrationSource: Clinical trial registry (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN)
No trial registration found
Assessment Rationale:How INSPECT-AI determined the prospective registration status by comparing dates Registry registration date (study_first_submit_qc_date) is missing or empty.
Study Design EvidenceDates and timelines extracted by INSPECT-AI from the publication text
Recruitment Start: 10-09-2013
Recruitment Start Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment start date Results: 'From the trial's start date (10 September 2013)...' is taken as the recruitment start date.
Recruitment End: 25-10-2017
Recruitment End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment end date Results: '...to the last recruited patient (25 October 2017), 518 patients...' is taken as the recruitment finish date.
Study End: N/A
Study End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the study end date No explicit study end date found; the 'final follow-up' date is not stated.
Overall — What is the overall integrity assessment of the study?
Rationale: One investigator with retraction due to data issues.