Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisEurope PMC

What is the clinically significant ideal mesenchymal stromal cell count in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee? - Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Muthu S., Mir AA., Kumar R., Yadav V., Jeyaraman M., Khanna M.

Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 564 on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, Cartilage Damage, published in J Clin Orthop Trauma (2022) — 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
J Clin Orthop Trauma (2022)
Reported sample size
564
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35004170
PMCID
PMC8719017
DOI
10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101744
Citations
14

Abstract (original English)

Study design Meta-analysis. Objectives We aim to identify the clinically significant ideal Mesenchymal Stem Cell (MSC) count in the management of osteoarthritis of knee from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) available in the literature. Materials and methods We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library till August 2021 for RCTs conducted in the management of knee osteoarthritis using MSC therapy specifying the quantity of MSCs delivered. We categorized the studies based on the MSC count utilized in them into four groups namely 7 MSCs (Group I), 1-5x10 7 MSCs (Group II), 5-10 × 10 7 MSCs (Group III), and >10 × 10 7 MSCs (Group IV). Visual Analog Score (VAS) for Pain, Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lysholm score, Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and adverse events were the outcomes analyzed. Analysis was performed in R-platform using OpenMeta [Analyst] software. Results 14 studies involving 564 patients were included for analysis. We noted incremental decrease in the VAS with increasing dosage of MSCs at 12 months [Group I,WMD = 2.641(p = 0.854); Group II, WMD = -4.853(p = 0.379); Group III, WMD = -12.154 (p = 0.316); Group IV, WMD = -15.935(p = 0.116)], and 24 months [Group I,WMD = -6(p = 0.001); Group II, WMD = -15(p = 0.001); Group IV, WMD = -20

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