Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMC

Recent advances and future directions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Can biological joint reconstruction replace joint arthroplasty and when?

Paschos NK.

Laboratory Study on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in World J Orthop (2015) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
World J Orthop (2015)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
26495242
PMCID
PMC4610907
DOI
10.5312/wjo.v6.i9.655
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

In this article, a concise description of the recent advances in the field of osteoarthritis management is presented. The main focus is to highlight the most promising techniques that emerge in both biological joint replacement and artificial joint arthroplasty. A critical view of high quality evidence regarding outcome and safety profile of these techniques is presented. The potential role of kinematically aligned total knee replacement, navigation, and robotic-assisted surgery is outlined. A critical description of both primary and stem cell-based therapies, the cell homing theory, the use of biologic factors and recent advancements in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine is provided. Based on the current evidence, some thoughts on a realistic approach towards answering these questions are attempted.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

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