Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyPubMed

Cell-based therapy injections for the management of knee osteoarthritis: The ESSKA-ICRS consensus. Recommendations using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method for different clinical scenarios.

de Girolamo L., Kon E., Laver L., Andriolo L., Boffa A., Bagge J.

Prospective Study on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • 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
Prospective Study
Journal
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc (2026)
Country
Germany
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
42360177
DOI
10.1002/ksa.70487

Abstract (original English)

The aim of this consensus was to develop evidence/expert-based patient-focused recommendations on the appropriateness of intra-articular point-of-care (POC) cell-based therapy (CBT) injections in different clinical scenarios of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used by European experts of the European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) and the International Cartilage Regeneration and Joint Preservation Society (ICRS) to reach a consensus and produce recommendations for specific patient categories, combining best available scientific evidence with the collective judgement of a panel of experts. A total of 144 scenarios were developed based on five factors: cell source (bone marrow vs. adipose tissue), age (<50 vs. 50-65 vs. 66-80 vs. >80 years), joint involvement (prevalent tibio-femoral vs. patello-femoral), OA level (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] Grade 0-I vs. II-III vs. IV) and body mass index (BMI) (<18.5 vs. 18.5-35 vs. >35 kg/m 2 ). Following two voting rounds, agreement was reached for all 144 (100%) scenarios: the indication was considered appropriate in 11.8%, inappropriate in 34.7% and uncertain in 53.5%. The parameters with the highest appropriateness were OA Grade II-III (35.4% appropriate scenarios), age <50 years (22.2% appropriate) and BMI 18.5-35 kg/m 2 (20.8% appropriate). The parameters w

What this study does not prove

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

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
HumansOsteoarthritis, KneeInjections, Intra-ArticularMiddle AgedAgedCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyAged, 80 and overPoint-of-Care Systems

Browse all related research

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

Related research