Ge 2006.

Methods	Type of study: parallel RCT Type of publication: full Source of funding: Shanghai Scientific Research Fund Country of origin: China Number of centres: 1 Dates of trial enrolment: not reported Length of follow‐up: 6 months Number (N) of participants randomised to each arm: 10 in treatment arm/10 in control arm Number (N) of participants analysed (primary outcome) in each arm: 10 in treatment arm/10 in control arm
Participants	Population: AMI, within 24 hours. PCI within 24 hours. Cell transplantation after successful PCI Age, mean (SD) each arm: 58 (11) years in treatment arm, 59 (8) years in control arm Sex, % male in each arm: 80% in treatment arm, 100% in control arm Number of diseased vessels: 1:7, 2:2, 3:1 in treatment arm; 1:7, 2:3, 3:0 in control arm Number of stunned hyperkinetic, etc segments: not reported Time from symptom onset to initial treatment: 7.9 (3.8) hour in treatment arm/7.1(3.1) hour in control arm Statistically significant baseline imbalances between the groups?: none
Interventions	Intervention arm: BMMNC Type of stem cells: bone marrow‐derived stem cells (mononuclear cells‐MNC) Summary of how stem cells were isolated and type and route of delivery: bone marrow aspirate (40 mL). The method of cell separation was not reported. Cells were infused after successful PCI Dose of stem cells: a single dose of 4 x 107/mL mononuclear cells Timing of stem cell procedure: cells infused within 15 hours of onset of AMI Comparator arm: 15 mL injection of bone marrow supernatant
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: LVEF, LVEDD, myocardial perfusion defect Secondary outcomes: not listed Outcome assessment points: baseline, 1 week and 6 months Method(s): echocardiography
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomised in a 1:1 ratio with the use of sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Sequentially numbered, sealed envelopes were used
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Controls underwent bone marrow aspiration and received an injection of BM supernatant. The study states that clinical data were acquired and analysed in a 'blinded fashion' by clinicians who were blinded to the groups' identities
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	All randomised participants were included in the analysis of clinical outcomes and scientific outcomes
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	All outcomes mentioned in the methods were reported in the results, although it would be difficult to rule out selective reporting
Other bias	Low risk	None reported or identified