Current Trends in Orthobiologics: An 11-Year Review of the Orthopaedic Literature.
Obana KK., Schallmo MS., Hong IS., Ahmad CS., Moorman CT., Trofa DP.
Systematic Review, published in Am J Sports Med (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Am J Sports Med (2021)
- Country
- United States
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 34528456
- DOI
- 10.1177/03635465211037343
Abstract (original English)
The use of "orthobiologics" or regenerative therapies in orthopaedic surgery has grown in recent years. Particular interest has been raised with regard to platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate, adipose-derived cells, and amniotic cells. Although studies have analyzed outcomes after orthobiologic treatment, no study has analyzed how the literature as a whole has evolved. To evaluate trends in platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate, adipose-derived cells, and amniotic cell publications and to assess how these might inform efforts to establish minimum reporting standards and forecast future use. Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. A database was compiled systematically using PubMed to identify articles published between 2009 and 2019 within 9 prominent orthopaedic journals and pertaining to the use of platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate, adipose-derived cells, and amniotic cells in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. Included articles were classified as clinical, nonclinical (translational or basic science), or review, and a variety of study parameters were recorded for each. Additional queries were performed to identify articles that utilized minimum reporting standards. A total of 474 articles (132 clinical, 271 nonclinical, 71 review) were included, consisting of 244 (51.5%) platelet-rich plasma, 146 (30.8%) bone marrow aspirate, 72 (15.2%) adipose
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.