Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialEurope PMCOpen access

Considering the Cellular Landscape in Marrow Stimulation Techniques for Cartilage Repair

Hasson M., Fernandes LM., Solomon H., Pepper T., Huffman NL., Pucha SA.

Clinical Trial on Cartilage Damage, Rotator Cuff, Chronic Wound, published in Cells Tissues Organs (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • 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
Clinical Trial
Journal
Cells Tissues Organs (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38599194
PMCID
PMC11633897
DOI
10.1159/000538530
Citations
7

Abstract (original English)

Background Marrow stimulation is a common reparative approach to treat injuries to cartilage and other soft tissues (e.g., rotator cuff). It involves the recruitment of bone marrow elements and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) into the defect, theoretically initiating a regenerative process. However, the resulting repair tissue is often weak and susceptible to deterioration with time. The populations of cells at the marrow stimulation site (beyond MSCs), and their contribution to inflammation, vascularity, and fibrosis, may play a role in quality of the repair tissue. Summary In this review, we accomplish three goals: (1) systematically review clinical trials on the augmentation of marrow stimulation and evaluate their assumptions on the biological elements recruited; (2) detail the cellular populations in bone marrow and their impact on healing; and (3) highlight emerging technologies and approaches that could better guide these specific cell populations towards enhanced cartilage or soft tissue formation. Key messages We found that most clinical trials do not account for cell heterogeneity, nor do they specify the regenerative element recruited, and those that do typically utilize descriptions such as "clots," "elements," and "blood." Furthermore, our review of bone marrow cell populations demonstrates a dramatically heterogenous cell population, including hematopoietic cells, i

What this study does not prove

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

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
CartilageBone Marrow CellsMesenchymal Stem CellsBone MarrowAnimalsHumansMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationWound Healing

Browse all related research

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

Related research