Analysis of Intraarticular Application of Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Platelet Rich Plasma in Treatment for Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of human mesenchymal cells (MSC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the knee represents a less invasive therapy with a promising effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to identify the efficacy and safety in the treatment of osteoarthritis with intra-articular application of MSC compared to PRP and a placebo group. 50 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee were selected, the patients were divided into 5 groups with 10 members each; three of these groups were from MSC: the low-dose (1.0 10 7 cells), mid-dose (5.0 10 7 ), and high-dose (1.0 10 8 ); another group for PRP and the last for placebo group, and were infiltrated a single occasion. All patients were followed up with Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and Lequesne index at the beginning of the study and at the 3, 6, 9 and 12 months as primary controls, As well as arthroscopies and radiographs were randomly performed at the beginning and at the end of the study as secondary controls. There was no treatment related adverse event. The results of the primary controls showed a significant improvement for the low-dose and mid-dose of MSC groups, with a peak in improvement at 9 months. Arthroscopy showed that the size of cartilage defect decreased in the medial femoral and medial tibial condyles of the mid-dose group. These results showed that the application of mid-dose of MSC in osteoarthritis improves the function and pain in the knee, compared to the placebo group and other types of treatment as the PRP. We conducted a proof-of-concept phase I/II clinical trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".