Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialEurope PMCOpen access

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate (BMAC) for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Narrative Review of Clinical Efficacy and Future Directions

Park D., Koh HS., Choi YH., Park I.

Randomized Controlled Trial on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in Medicina (Kaunas) (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • 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
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
Medicina (Kaunas) (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40428811
PMCID
PMC12113016
DOI
10.3390/medicina61050853
Citations
9

Abstract (original English)

Bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) is an autologous regenerative therapy enriched with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and bioactive growth factors, offering potential disease-modifying effects in knee osteoarthritis (OA). Compared to conventional intra-articular treatments, including hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and corticosteroids, BMAC promotes cartilage regeneration, modulates inflammation, and enhances subchondral bone remodeling. Clinical evidence suggests that BMAC provides short- to mid-term symptomatic relief and functional improvement, with some studies indicating a potential to delay total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, findings remain inconsistent, and long-term efficacy compared to PRP or autologous conditioned serum (ACS) is yet to be firmly established. Variability in BMAC preparation methods, injection protocols (single vs. repeated administration, intra-articular vs. subchondral delivery), and patient selection criteria complicates its clinical application, highlighting the need for standardized guidelines. Additionally, economic feasibility and cost-effectiveness concerns limit its widespread adoption. This review synthesizes current clinical evidence, evaluates optimal administration strategies, and explores future directions for improving treatment standardization and patient-specific therapy. Future research should prioritize well

What this study does not prove

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

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
HumansOsteoarthritis, KneeTreatment OutcomeBone Marrow TransplantationMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationInjections, Intra-ArticularPlatelet-Rich Plasma

Browse all related research

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

Related research