Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsClinical TrialPubMed

The efficacy of different sources of mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Shariatzadeh M., Song J., Wilson SL.

Clinical Trial on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in Cell Tissue Res (2019) — 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
Cell Tissue Res (2019)
Country
Germany
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
31309317
DOI
10.1007/s00441-019-03069-9

Abstract (original English)

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common cause of chronic pain and disability. Regenerative therapies using mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) provide an option for OA treatment as it could potentially regenerate the damaged cartilage. Bone marrow, adipose tissue and synovium are common MSC sources. The aim is to compare the therapeutic effect of MSCs from bone marrow, adipose tissue and synovium; combining its differentiation potential and accessibility, to decide the optimal source of MSCs for the treatment of knee OA. A comparison of preclinical and clinical studies using MSCs has been made with regard to treatment outcomes, isolation procedure and differentiation potential. All types of MSCs are effective at improving the clinical and structural condition of OA patients, but the longevity of the treatment, i.e. an effect that is maintained for at least 2 years, cannot be guaranteed. This review highlighted great variations in selection criteria and culture expansion conditions of MSCs between the literature and clinical trials. It also emphasised a substantial diversity and lack of consistency in the assessment mythology of clinical outcome after completion of MSC therapies procedures. A more cohesive methodology is required to evaluate the outcome of MSC treatments using quantitative and standardised frameworks in order to be able to directly compare results. Larger population of patien

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
AnimalsClinical Trials as TopicHumansInjections, Intra-ArticularMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationMesenchymal Stem CellsOsteoarthritis, KneeRegenerationSynovial MembraneTreatment Outcome

Browse all related research

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

Related research