MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206058216 · doi:10.1177/03635465211053893

Intra-articular Injection of Autologous Adipose-Derived Stem Cells or Stromal Vascular Fractions: Are They Effective for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis? A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2022· article· en· W4206058216 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Health Industry Development Institute
KeywordsKnee cartilageRandomized controlled trialStem cellStromal cellRegeneration (biology)AdjuvantCartilageClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intra-articular injection of adipose-derived stem cells, which are divided into adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ASCs) and adipose-derived stromal vascular fractions (ADSVFs), has been reported to be a viable treatment modality for knee osteoarthritis (OA); however, its efficacy remains limited. PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide comprehensive information about the efficacy and safety of intra-articular injections of autologous ASCs and ADSVFs without adjuvant treatment in patients with knee OA. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of intra-articular injections of autologous ASCs or ADSVFs without adjuvant treatments compared with placebo or hyaluronic acid in patients with knee OA. Clinically, the 100-mm visual analog scale for pain relief and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index for functional improvement were implemented. Radiologically, cartilage status was assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Procedure-related knee pain, swelling, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated for safety. Additionally, we performed subgroup analyses comparing ASCs versus ADSVFs. Methodological quality was assessed using the modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS). RESULTS: = .0002), without a difference in procedure-related knee pain or swelling compared with controls. Although a meta-analysis with regard to cartilage improvements was not performed owing to heterogeneous MRI assessment, 3 studies reported significantly improved cartilage status after the injection. No serious AEs associated with ASCs or ADSVFs were reported. Subgroup analyses showed similar efficacy between ASC and ADSVF treatments. The median mCMS was 70 (range, 55-75). CONCLUSION: For patients with knee OA, intra-articular injection of autologous ASCs or ADSVFs without adjuvant treatment showed remarkable clinical efficacy and safety at short-term follow-up. Some degree of efficacy has been shown for cartilage regeneration in knee OA, although the evidence remains limited. Further RCTs that directly compare ASCs and ADSVFs are needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.035
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207