Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Allogenic perinatal tissue for musculoskeletal regenerative medicine applications: a systematic review protocol

Aratikatla A., Maffulli N., Rodriguez HC., Gupta M., Potty AG., El-Amin SF.

Systematic Review, published in J Orthop Surg Res (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

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.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Systematic Review
Journal
J Orthop Surg Res (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35690774
PMCID
PMC9188718
DOI
10.1186/s13018-022-03197-z
Citations
14

Abstract (original English)

Background Musculoskeletal ailments impact the lives of millions of people, and at times necessitate surgery followed by physiotherapy, drug treatments, or immobilization. Regenerative musculoskeletal medicine has undergone enormous progress over the last few decades. Sources of tissues used for regenerative medicine purposes can be grouped into autologous or allogenic. Although autologous sources are promising, there is a wide range of limitations with the treatment, including the lack of randomized controlled studies for orthopaedic conditions, donor site morbidity, and highly variable outcomes for patients. Allogenic sources bypass some of these shortcomings and are a promising source for orthopaedic regenerative medicine applications. Methods A systematic search will be performed using PubMed, Elsevier, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases for articles published in English before May 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and guidelines will be used. Studies will be eligible if they apply to acute and chronic orthopaedic musculoskeletal complications or animal or human disease models. Publications must include the use of MSCs and/or tissue obtained from amniotic/chorionic membrane, amniotic fluid, umbilical cord, and/or umbilical cord-derived Wharton's jelly as an intervention. Placebos, noninjury models, acute injury m

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
Musculoskeletal SystemUmbilical CordAnimalsHumansMusculoskeletal DiseasesRegenerative MedicinePregnancyFemaleWharton JellySystematic Reviews as Topic

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.