Clinical therapeutic efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells derived from adipose or bone marrow for knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This meta-analysis, only including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), was conducted to assess separately and compare the therapeutic efficacy of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) and bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) at the same follow-up time. Methods: Potential relevant researches were identified from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov. The data, from clinical trials concentrating on knee OA treated with ADMSCs or BMSCs, were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with knee OA in visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lysholm knee scale (Lysholm) and Tegner activity scale (Tegner). Results: Nine randomized controlled trials including a total of 377 patients met the inclusion criteria. This meta-analysis obtained the following results. First, the improvement of VAS scores was statistically significant after BMSCs treatment at 6-, 12- and 24-month follow-up compared with control groups (p < 0.01). In contrast, the improvement of WOMAC scores was of no statistical significance, but showed a positive trend with the prolongation of the follow-up time (6 months: mean difference [MD] = 6.51; 95% CI: -2.38 to 15.40; p = 0.15; 12 months: MD = -6.81; 95% CI: -13.94 to 0.33; p = 0.06). Lysholm scores presented a similar pattern (12 months: MD = 1.93; 95% CI: -11.52 to 15.38; p = 0.78; 24 months: MD = 8.94; 95% CI: 1.45 to 16.43; p = 0.02). Second, VAS and WOMAC scores of patients after ADMSCs treatment were significantly improved at any follow-up time (p ≤ 0.05). The improvement of Lysholm scores was of no statistical significance compared with control groups, although treatment outcome at 12-month follow-up was better than that at 24-month follow-up, which was debatable because only data of one clinical trial were pooled in the analysis (12 months: MD = 7.50; 95% CI: -1.94 to 16.94; p = 0.12; 24 months: MD = 5.10; 95% CI: -3.02 to 13.22; p = 0.22). Finally, by comparing the statistical results of VAS and WOMAC scores, it could be concluded that the therapeutic effect of ADMSCs on knee OA was more effective than that of BMSCs. Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that regeneration with BMSCs or ADMSCs had a great application potential in the treatment of patients with knee OA, and ADMSCs tended to be superior to BMSCs according to the limited clinical evidences available.
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 | 0.028 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.028 | 0.069 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".