Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Regenerative Cartilage Treatment for Focal Chondral Defects in the Knee: Focus on Marrow-Stimulating and Cell-Based Scaffold Approaches

Migliorini F., Simeone F., Bardazzi T., Memminger MK., Pipino G., Vaishya R.

Narrative Review on Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in Cells (2025) — 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
Cells (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
40801648
PMCID
PMC12346709
DOI
10.3390/cells14151217
Citations
5

Abstract (original English)

Focal chondral defects of the knee are a common cause of pain and functional limitation in active individuals and may predispose to early degenerative joint changes. Given the limited regenerative capacity of hyaline cartilage, biologically based surgical strategies have emerged to promote tissue repair and restore joint function. This narrative review critically examines current treatment approaches that rely on autologous cell sources and scaffold-supported regeneration. Particular emphasis is placed on techniques that stimulate endogenous repair or support chondrocyte-based tissue restoration through the use of autologous biomaterial constructs. The influence of lesion morphology, joint biomechanics, and patient-specific variables on treatment selection is discussed in detail, focusing on the differences between tibiofemoral and patellofemoral involvement. Biologically driven approaches have shown promising mid- to long-term outcomes in selected patients, and are increasingly favoured over traditional methods in specific clinical scenarios. However, the literature remains limited by heterogeneity in study design, follow-up duration, and outcome measures. This review aims to provide an evidence-based, morphology-informed framework to support the clinical decision-making process in the management of knee cartilage defects.

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
Cartilage, ArticularKnee JointChondrocytesAnimalsHumansCartilage DiseasesTissue EngineeringRegenerationTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

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

Related research