Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMedOpen access

Stromal cell-based injection therapies for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review of level I randomized controlled trials.

Dhillon J., Maguire JA., Kraeutler MJ.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 972 on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in Osteoarthr Cartil Open (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
Systematic Review
Journal
Osteoarthr Cartil Open (2025)
Country
England
Reported sample size
972
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40290651
PMCID
PMC12033899
DOI
10.1016/j.ocarto.2025.100608

Abstract (original English)

Objective To systematically review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare clinical outcomes of stromal cell-based injection therapies versus other non-operative treatment modalities for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Method A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE to locate RCTs, published since 2019, comparing stromal cell-based injection therapies versus other non-operative modalities for the treatment of knee OA. The search terms used were: knee AND osteoarthritis AND injection AND randomized . Results Seventeen studies (all Level I evidence) were included in this review with 972 patients undergoing treatment with stromal cell-based therapy (Intervention Group) and 651 patients in the control group (Control Group). Among the 17 studies, 7 used autologous adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) (ADMSCs), 2 studies used allogeneic ADMSCs, 4 used autologous bone marrow-derived MSCs (BMMSCs), 1 used allogeneic BMMSCs, 1 used allogeneic placental MSCs, 1 used umbilical cord-derived MSCs (UCMSCs), and 1 study used autologous ADMSCs, BMMSCs, or allogeneic UCMSCs. All but 3 studies reported significantly better clinical or radiological outcomes in the Intervention Group at final follow-up. A total of 5 and 3 studies reported adverse events occurring in the Intervention and the Control groups, respectively, but t

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

Browse all related research

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

Related research