Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Is Equivalent to Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis at 1 Year: A Prospective, Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 47 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with arthritis. Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections have been documented to alleviate symptoms related to knee osteoarthritis (OA) in randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMC) injections have also emerged as a treatment option for knee OA, with a limited clinical evidence base. PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of BMC to PRP for the treatment of knee OA regarding pain and function at multiple time points up to 12 months after an injection. We hypothesized that BMC will be more effective in improving outcomes in patients with knee OA. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 90 participants aged between 18 and 80 years with symptomatic knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grades 1-3) were randomized into 2 study groups: PRP and BMC. Both groups completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaires before and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after a single intra-articular injection of leukocyte-rich PRP or BMC. RESULTS: < .001). These improvements were sustained for 12 months after the injection, with no difference between PRP and BMC at any time point. CONCLUSION: Both PRP and BMC were effective in improving patient-reported outcomes in patients with mild to moderate knee OA for at least 12 months; neither treatment provided a superior clinical benefit. Autologous PRP and BMC showed promising clinical potential as therapeutic agents for the treatment of OA, and while PRP has strong clinical evidence to support its efficacy, BMC has limited support. This study did not prove BMC to be superior to PRP, providing guidance to clinicians treating OA. It is possible that the results were affected by patients knowing that there was no control group. REGISTRATION: NCT03289416 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".