MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229332354 · doi:10.7759/cureus.24823

Safety and Efficacy of Injecting Mesenchymal Stem Cells Into a Human Knee Joint To Treat Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4229332354 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shoukrie I Shoukrie, Sathish Venugopal, Ravneet K Dhanoa, Ramaneshwar Selvaraj, Tharun Yadhav Selvamani, Anam Zahra, Jyothirmai Malla, Ranim K Hamouda, Pousette Hamid

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMesenchymal stem cellOsteoarthritisWOMACStem cellMagnetic resonance imagingBone marrowAdipose tissueSurgeryPathologyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intraarticular stem cell therapy has become increasingly used to treat knee osteoarthritis (KOA) with minimal high-quality evidence to support its use. This study aims to see how well intra-articular injections of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) worked and how safe they were for individuals with KOA. A total of 10 studies were extracted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PMC from 2017 to 2021 in the English language. An assessment of the risk of bias was applied via the Cochrane Collaborative Bias Risk Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality. Changes in pain and functional outcomes in patients with KOA were measured by a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) scores, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores at baseline, and follow-up evaluation criteria. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was evaluated using the whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score (WORMS) and cartilage volume changes. A total of six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three prospective retrospective clinical trials, and one retrospective clinical trial included 723 patients. They were diagnosed with unilateral or bilateral KOA with Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade 1-4 KOA and followed up for six, 12, and 24 months. The experimental groups received multipotent MSCs, mesenchymal progenitor cells (MPCs), adipose tissue progenitor stem cells (AD-MPCs), adipose tissue mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs), bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs), bone marrow aspiration (BMA), bone marrow aspiration concentration (BMAC), or micro fragmented adipose tissue (MFAT) while the controlled groups received normal saline (NS), hyaluronic acid (HA), placebo, or went through conservative management. In conclusion, significant improvements were noticed in the MSCs groups via different outcome measuring tools like KOOS, VAS, WOMAC, and MRI. Furthermore, no significant adverse events (AEs) have been observed. Therefore, intra-articular injections of MSCs are effective and safe in relieving pain and improving motor function in individuals with KOA in the short term, contrary to earlier research findings.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.010
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207