Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsRetrospective StudyPubMedOpen access

Intraoperative Administration of Adipose Stromal Vascular Fraction Does Not Improve Functional Outcomes in Young Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Su WC., Tuan-Mu HY., Lee HM., Hung TY., Liu KL.

Retrospective Study on Ligament Injury, published in J Clin Med (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • 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
Retrospective Study
Journal
J Clin Med (2022)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
36362468
PMCID
PMC9654782
DOI
10.3390/jcm11216240

Abstract (original English)

Adipose stromal vascular fraction (SVF) has a versatile cellular system for biologically augmented therapies. However, there have been no clinical studies investigating the benefits of the augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with SVF. We conducted a retrospective study in assessing the effects of intraoperative SVF administration on the functional outcomes in young patients with ACLR. The enrolled patients were divided into the control group (ACLR only) and the SVF group (ACLR with SVF). The functional outcomes in both groups were assessed by the Lysholm knee scoring system, the Tegner activity scale, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective evaluation form, and compared at several time points during a 12-month follow-up. We found that the sex distribution and pre-surgery scores were similar in the two groups, whereas the mean age of the SVF group was higher than that of the control group ( p = 0.046). The between-group analysis and generalized estimating equation model analysis revealed that, while patients in the SVF group significantly improved all their functional outcomes at 12 months after surgery, this improvement was not significantly different from the results of patients in the control group (Lysholm, p = 0.553; Tegner, p = 0.197; IKDC, p = 0.486). No side effects were observed in either group. We concluded that

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research