Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Concepts in regenerative medicine: Past, present, and future in articular cartilage treatment

Anz AW., Bapat A., Murrell WD.

Narrative Review on Cartilage Damage, published in J Clin Orthop Trauma (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • 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
Narrative Review
Journal
J Clin Orthop Trauma (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
27489407
PMCID
PMC4949414
DOI
10.1016/j.jcot.2016.05.006
Citations
17

Abstract (original English)

Regenerative medicine is emerging with great interest and hope from patients, industry, academia, and medical professionals. Cartilage regeneration, restoration, or repair is one of the prime targets that remains largely unsolved, and many believe that regenerative medicine can possibly deliver solutions that can be widely used to address the current gap(s) in treatment. In the United States, Europe, Australia, and India the regulation of regenerative based treatments has become a big debate. Although the rules and regulations remain unclear, clinicians that are interested should carry-on with the best available guidelines to ensure safety and compliance during delivery in clinical practice to avoid regulatory infraction. Many have made significant investment of time, resources, and facilities in recent years to provide new regenerative treatment options and advance medical care for patients. Instead of reinventing the wheel, it would be more efficient to adopt currently accepted standards and nomenclature borrowed from transplantation science, and cord blood storage industries. The purposes of this article are to provide some historical background to the field of regenerative medicine as it applies to cartilage, and how this field has developed. This will be followed by a separate discussion on regulatory oversight and input and how it has influenced access to care. Furthermor

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research