Fig. 2

Variable Angiogenic Efficacies of MSCs from Different Donors. (A and B) Representative immunostaining images for CD31 and α-SMA in the border zone of infarcted hearts at 4 weeks post-MI (A) and statistical analysis (B). ***P < 0.001 versus Ctrl; # < 0.05, ## P < 0.01 versus MSC-CX. (C) Representative images illustrating the tube formation of HUVECs on Matrigel and statistical analysis. ***P < 0.001 versus Ctrl; ### P < 0.001 versus MSC-CX. (D) Representative images depicting HUVEC migration and statistical analysis. **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 versus Ctrl; ## P < 0.0,1 ### P < 0.001 versus MSC-CX; ns versus MSC-CJ. (E) Statistical analysis of HUVEC proliferation treated with conditional medium (CM) from UC-MSCs. **P < 0.01 versus Ctrl; ns versus MSC-CJ. (F) GO term analysis highlighting the secreted proteins highly expressed in the CM of MSC-GY and MSC-CJ. (G) Heatmap illustrating the expression levels of angiogenesis-related factors in the CM of MSC-GY, MSC-CJ, and MSC-CX. Statistical significance assessed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc. Scale bar: 100 μm