SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysis

Adipose-Derived Cell Therapies Versus Nonactive Controls for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Madrazo-Ibarra A., de la Huerta-Meza D., Gutierrez Naranjo JM., Vad VB.

Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 585 on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in Am J Phys Med Rehabil (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Meta-analysis
Journal
Am J Phys Med Rehabil (2026)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
585
PMID
41592340
DOI
10.1097/PHM.0000000000002908

Abstract (original English)

The aim of the study was to compare adipose-derived cell therapies versus nonactive controls in treating knee osteoarthritis. This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials comparing adipose-derived cell therapies with placebo or no treatment in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Two reviewers extracted study, patient, and intervention data, as well as patient-reported outcomes. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for outcomes reported in at least three studies. The primary outcome was pain improvement at 6 mos, with secondary outcomes including function, quality of life, and adverse events. Eight randomized controlled trials (585 patients) were included. Adipose-derived cell therapies showed superior pain improvement versus controls at 6 mos, with WOMAC Pain (MD = -1.75, 95% CI = -2.62 to -0.88) and KOOS Pain (MD = 7.95, 95% CI = 0.98 to 14.93) achieving statistical significance. Functional outcomes also improved significantly, while quality of life favored adipose-derived cell therapy but did not reach significance. No serious adverse events occurred, although two patients reported severe events after adipose-derived cell therapy. At 6 mos, adipose-derived cell therapies provided greater pain relief and functional improvement than nonactive controls, although no benefit was observed for quality-of-life. Severe adverse events were uncomm

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
HumansOsteoarthritis, KneeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdipose TissueCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeFemale
KneeKnee OsteoarthritisOsteoarthritis
View on PubMedDOI

Related research