Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Regenerative Therapies in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain: 2025 Update from the American Society Of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

Manchikanti L., Navani R., Navani A., Sanapati M., Kaye AD., Kaye AM.

Systematic Review on Back Pain, Scar, published in Pain Physician (2025) — 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: Systematic Review
Journal: Pain Physician (2025)
Country: United States
Reported sample size: —
PMID: 41481869

Abstract (original English)

Regenerative medicine is an evolving medical subspecialty dedicated to enhancing the body's natural healing mechanisms to repair or replace damaged tissues. By using autologous or allogeneic biologics, it offers the potential to restore function where conventional therapies have shown limited success. While this field holds great promise and continues to generate enthusiasm among both patients and clinicians, it remains in early stages of clinical validation. Therefore, it must be approached with careful optimism and responsible application, ensuring that its presentation, promotion, and use in clinical settings are grounded in evidence and ethical standards. To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the role of regenerative therapies in managing moderate to severe chronic low back pain. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, convened by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP), systematically reviewed the current evidence and incorporated patient perspectives to develop practical, evidence-informed recommendations. The process included defining key clinical questions, reviewing the literature, formulating evidence-based statements, and reaching consensus through structured discussions and formal voting. A total of 35 authors contributed to the development of these guidelines, with 33 experts participating in the formal consensus process. Altog

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

HumansLow Back PainEvidence-Based MedicineChronic PainRegenerative MedicineSocieties, MedicalUnited States

Face & Skin Back & Spine Back Pain Scar

View on PubMed

Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Regenerative Therapies in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain: 2025 Update from the American Society Of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

Abstract (original English)

What this study does not prove

Evidence level

Related research

Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for the Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.

Stem cells and discogenic back pain.

Potential Role for Stem Cell Regenerative Therapy as a Treatment for Degenerative Disc Disease and Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

Responsible, Safe, and Effective Use of Biologics in the Management of Low Back Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines.

A systematic review of the safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells for disc degeneration: insights and future directions for regenerative therapeutics.

Safety and Feasibility of Intradiscal Administration of Matrilin-3-Primed Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Spheroids for Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain: Phase 1 Clinical Trial.