Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMedOpen access

Forty Years of the Use of Cells for Cartilage Regeneration: The Research Side.

Roseti L., Cavallo C., Desando G., D'Alessandro M., Grigolo B.

Narrative Review on Cartilage Damage, published in Pharmaceutics (2024) — 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
Pharmaceutics (2024)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
39771600
PMCID
PMC11677864
DOI
10.3390/pharmaceutics16121622

Abstract (original English)

Background: The treatment of articular cartilage damage has always represented a problem of considerable practical interest for orthopedics. Over the years, many surgical techniques have been proposed to induce the growth of repairing tissue and limit degeneration. In 1994, the turning point occurred: implanted autologous cells paved the way for a new treatment option based more on regeneration than repair. Objectives: This review aims to outline biological and clinical advances, from the use of mature adult chondrocytes to cell-derived products, going through progenitor cells derived from bone marrow or adipose tissue and their concentrates for articular cartilage repair. Moreover, it highlights the relevance of gene therapy as a valuable tool for successfully implementing current regenerative treatments, and overcoming the limitations of the local delivery of growth factors. Conclusions: Finally, this review concludes with an outlook on the importance of understanding the role and mechanisms of action of the different cell compounds with a view to implementing personalized treatments.

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