Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisPubMed

Microfragmented Adipose Tissue as an Alternative to Platelet-Rich Plasma for Intra-articular Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Park YB., Lee SK., Kim KI., Yoo JH., Jung T., Kim JH.

Meta-analysis on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in Am J Sports Med (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

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
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
Meta-analysis
Journal
Am J Sports Med (2025)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40990578
DOI
10.1177/03635465251337759

Abstract (original English)

Intra-articular (IA) injections of orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and microfragmented adipose tissue (MFAT), have recently gained attention as treatments for knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, clinical evidence supporting their use remains limited. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IA injections of PRP and MFAT in patients with knee OA and to compare these 2 treatment modalities. Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2. A systematic search was conducted in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of PRP or MFAT injections in knee OA. Outcomes included pain relief (measured by the 100-mm visual analog scale), functional improvement (assessed by the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score), and safety (assessed by procedure-related adverse events). The minimal clinically important difference was used to evaluate the clinical significance of the treatments, and a meta-analysis was performed to compare PRP and MFAT. Methodological quality was assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Six randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Both PRP and MFAT achieved minimal clinically important difference in most clinical outcomes up to 12 months after injection.

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 evidence
HumansOsteoarthritis, KneePlatelet-Rich PlasmaInjections, Intra-ArticularRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdipose TissueTreatment Outcome

Browse all related research

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

Related research