Abstract 4357313: Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

L Luiz Guilherme Silva Almeida (Catholic University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil) L Lucca Carretta (Higher School of Sciences of the Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória, Vitória, Brazil) L Luciano Falcão (Bahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador, Brazil) A Adolfo Souza (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil) Y Yasmin Silva (Healthcare Institution of South Iceland, Selfoss, Iceland) M Mariana Oliveira (Catholic University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil) R Ricardo Suruagy-Motta (Cesmac University Center, Maceio, Brazil) K Karlos Daniell Araujo Dos Santos (UFRR, Boa Vista, Brazil) R Rafael Fonseca (IDOMED Vista Carioca, RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil) G Gustavo Surgik (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil) M Matheus de Jesus Leone Pereira (Unimed Hospital of Volta Redonda, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) F Fernanda Andrade (Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil)

Abstract

Introduction: Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) has been proposed as a therapeutic strategy for improving cardiac repair after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). A previous meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the efficacy and safety of G-CSF but showed no statistically significant improvement. Recently, new studies provided an opportunity to update the current knowledge. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for RCTs comparing G-CSF to placebo or standard of care in AMI patients. The outcomes of interest were Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Volume (LVEDV), Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) and mortality. Eleven RCTs involving 1,073 patients were included. Results: G-CSF significantly reduced LVEDV in the echocardiography subgroup (MD: -4.39 mL; 95% CI -6.80, -1.98; p < 0.001), while no effect was observed in the MRI subgroup (MD: -0.19 mL; 95% CI -7.22, 6.84; p = 0.958). Similarly, LVEF improved significantly in the echocardiography subgroup (MD: 6.76%; 95% CI 1.62, 11.90; p = 0.010) but not in the MRI subgroup (MD: -0.08%; 95% CI -2.38, 2.22; p = 0.947). No impact was observed on mortality (RR:1.00, 95% CI 0.45, 2.23, p = 0.995). Conclusion: G-CSF was associated with a reduction in LVEDV and improvement in LVEF in echocardiography studies, suggesting potential structural benefits. However, clinical outcomes remained unchanged. Larger, high-quality trials are needed to better understand the therapeutic role of G-CSF in AMI patients.

Article Details

Journal Circulation
Volume / Issue Vol. 152, Issue Suppl_3
Published November 04, 2025
ISSN 0009-7322
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Circulation

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0009-7322 Health Sciences

Authors (12)

L

Luiz Guilherme Silva Almeida

Catholic University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil

L

Lucca Carretta

Higher School of Sciences of the Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória, Vitória, Brazil

L

Luciano Falcão

Bahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador, Brazil

A

Adolfo Souza

Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

Y

Yasmin Silva

Healthcare Institution of South Iceland, Selfoss, Iceland

M

Mariana Oliveira

Catholic University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil

R

Ricardo Suruagy-Motta

Cesmac University Center, Maceio, Brazil

K

Karlos Daniell Araujo Dos Santos

UFRR, Boa Vista, Brazil

R

Rafael Fonseca

IDOMED Vista Carioca, RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil

G

Gustavo Surgik

Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil

M

Matheus de Jesus Leone Pereira

Unimed Hospital of Volta Redonda, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

F

Fernanda Andrade

Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil