MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309126464 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061008

Combination of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2022· review· en· W4309126464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jinlong Zhao, Guihong Liang, Yanhong Han, Weiyi Yang, Nanjun Xu, Minghui Luo, Jianke Pan, Jun Liu, Lingfeng Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong ProvinceNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaJilin Office of Philosophy and Social ScienceNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaGuangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPlatelet-rich plasmaWOMACMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryMesenchymal stem cellInternal medicineVisual analogue scaleRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectPhysical therapyPlateletPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with KOA. INTERVENTIONS: Use of MSCs+PRP. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and adverse reactions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched from inception to 15 July 2021. MEASURES: ≥50%, a random-effect model was applied. RESULTS: Six controlled clinical trials with 493 cases were included. The meta-analysis results showed that in terms of the VAS score 3 months after treatment, MSCs+PRP had no significant effect on the reduction of the VAS score in patients with KOA compared with the control (p=0.09), hyaluronic acid (HA) (p=0.15) or PRP alone (p=0.07). MSCs+PRP was more effective in reducing the VAS score at 6 and 12 months after treatment than the control (WMD=-0.55, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.22, p<0.001), HA (WMD=-1.20, 95% CI -2.28 to -0.13, p=0.03) or PRP alone (WMD=-0.54, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.18, p=0.003). Regarding the decrease in the total WOMAC score at 3 and 6 months after treatment, MSCs+PRP showed better clinical efficacy than the control or HA alone (p<0.01). Compared with the control, MSCs+PRP exhibited no significant difference in reducing the total WOMAC score 12 months after treatment (p=0.39). There was no significant difference between MSCs+PRP and the control in terms of improvement of the KOOS 12 months after treatment (p=0.16). Compared with MSCs alone, MSCs+PRP exhibited no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions (p=0.22) 12 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with MSCs+PRP showed good clinical efficacy in improving pain and joint function in patients with KOA. Compared with MSCs alone, there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions with MSCs+PRP. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD 42021275830.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.051
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207