Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMed

Cell-based therapy in soft tissue sports injuries of the knee: a systematic review.

Kader N., Asopa V., Baryeh K., Sochart D., Maffulli N., Kader D.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 9 on Osteoarthritis, Meniscus Injury, Tendon Injury, Ligament Injury, published in Expert Opin Biol Ther (2021) — 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
Expert Opin Biol Ther (2021)
Country
England
Reported sample size
9
Source database
PubMed
PMID
33399489
DOI
10.1080/14712598.2021.1872538
Citations
10

Abstract (original English)

Introduction An ever-increasing number of clinics are offering purportedly 'regenerative' stem-cell treatments, although cell-based therapies may not primarily act as stem cells and have shown the ability to regenerate end-target tissues in some clinical studies only. We aim to systematically review the evidence for their use in soft-tissue sports injuries of the knee. Areas covered A search for articles pertaining to the use of preparations of, or containing, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in human subjects in sports knee injuries yielded 14 relevant results for inclusion after screening: 7 used cultured MSCs, 5 bone marrow concentrate (BMC), and the remaining 2 evaluated stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and tenocyte-like-cells. Most studies were level 3 or lower (n = 9). Expert opinion There is insufficient high-quality evidence for the use of cell-based therapies that demonstrates either ligamentous or tendinous healing, meniscal volume restoration, or post-traumatic osteoarthritis amelioration/regression. Methods of cell harvesting, preparation, and application are highly heterogenous. Efforts should be directed toward standardization of protocols and their reporting, starting with more basic scientific investigations of MSCs and their niche, as well as rigorous, large clinical RCTs adhering to the reporting principles set out by recent expert consensus.

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
Athletic InjuriesCell- and Tissue-Based TherapyHumansKnee JointSportsStromal Vascular Fraction

Browse all related research

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

Related research