Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

A comprehensive review of cell transplantation and platelet-rich plasma therapy for the treatment of disc degeneration-related back and neck pain: A systematic evidence-based analysis

Schol J., Tamagawa S., Volleman TNE., Ishijima M., Sakai D.

Systematic Review on Back Pain, Disc Degeneration, published in JOR Spine (2024) — 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
JOR Spine (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38919468
PMCID
PMC11196836
DOI
10.1002/jsp2.1348
Citations
22

Abstract (original English)

Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain predominate as the primary causes of disability. Cell- and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) products are potential therapies with clinical trials and reviews promoting their efficacy. Nonetheless, they frequently disregard the clinical significance of reported improvements. In this systematic review, the effectuated improvements in pain, disability, quality of life (QoL), and radiographic images are comprehensively described and scored on their clinical significance. An electronic database literature search was conducted on July 2023 for in-human assessment of cell or PRP products to alleviate discogenic pain. Papers were screened on quantitative pain, disability, QoL, radiographic improvements, and safety outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed through MINORS and Cochrane Source of Bias tools. Reported outcomes were obtained, calculated, and assessed to meet minimal clinically important difference (MCID) standards. From 7623 screened papers, a total of 80 articles met the eligibility criteria, presenting 68 specific studies. These presented at least 1974 treated patients. Overall, cell/PRP injections could alleviate pain and disability, resulting in MCID for pain and disability in up to a 2-year follow-up, similar to those observed in patients undergoing spinal fusion. Included trials predominantly presented high levels of bias, involved heterogeneous s

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research