Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialPubMed

Current Status of Stromal Vascular Fraction from Adipose Tissue in the Clinical Application for Osteoarthritis Treatment.

Im GI.

Clinical Trial on Osteoarthritis, published in Tissue Eng Regen Med (2025) — 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
Tissue Eng Regen Med (2025)
Country
Korea (South)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40478499
PMCID
PMC12297206
DOI
10.1007/s13770-025-00722-z

Abstract (original English)

Background Recently, regenerative medicine based on cell-based therapies has emerged as a therapeutic possibility for the management of osteoarthritis (OA). Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) is a cellular mixture obtained from lipoaspirate processed through either mechanical or enzymatic separation. SVF has been applied in several countries to treat OA patients without robust supporting evidence or comprehensive evaluation. Methods This review purposes to summarize clinical evidence regarding SVF as a therapeutic for OA and to introduce the author's perspective. Eleven studies were found suitable for this review; out of these, seven were randomized clinical trials and four were cohort studies. Results A review of controlled studies suggests that SVF may offer better symptomatic relief than placebo or hyaluronic acid in the long term, and the effect of SVF is comparable to that of bone marrow aspirate concentrates. Conclusion Prospective studies with improved control over the cell isolation method, dosage, and patient selection are necessary to provide convincing evidence of the benefits of SVF in treating OA.

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
HumansOsteoarthritisAdipose TissueStromal Vascular FractionRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Browse all related research

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

Related research