Effectiveness of Stromal Vascular Fraction (SVF) and Platelets Rich Plasma (PRP) in patients with Osteoarthritis: Study protocol for a phase III, prospective, randomized, controlled multi-center study: (SPOST study). (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Available evidence on the conservative treatment of osteoarthritis still leaves the place for questioning on the efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and on whether Stromal Vascular Fraction (SVF) offers a superior therapeutic tool. OBJECTIVE To assess the clinical efficacy of SVF as adjuvant therapy to PRP on functionality and tissue regeneration for osteoarthritis. METHODS In a multi-centric, randomized, triple-blind controlled trial, 130 individuals with osteoarthritis will be block-randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Patients will receive an initial single PRP or PRP + SVF injection, followed by one- and two-months PRP doses. The primary endpoint is the functional improvement measured with the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scale at 6 months follow-up. The secondary endpoints, gathered at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up will include clinical outcomes: Low Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (quick-DASH) score, Pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during maximal physical activity, SANE, the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) (in knee osteoarthritis cases), return to work and to sports in days; and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) AMADEUS score at 6 months and at 12 months. RESULTS Participants recruitment and data collection is expected to begin in August 2024. Final end-points will be gathered in august 2027. CONCLUSIONS The study results will provide insight into the clinical efficacy of SVF as adjuvant therapy to PRP on functionality and tissue regeneration in osteoarthritis. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05660824) and SNCTP CLINICALTRIAL This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05660824) and SNCTP.
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 | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.006 |
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".