MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411302086 · doi:10.1055/s-0044-1800942

Effects of Intra-articular Bone Marrow Aspirate Infiltration in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Clinical Study Comparing BMA versus Corticosteroid and Genicular Block

2025· article· en· W4411302086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Renata Clazzer, Dilamar Moreira Pinto, M. Krause, Tale Lucas Vieira Rolim, Ricardo Lyra de Oliveira, Diego Ariel de Lima

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Ortopedia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisCorticosteroidRandomized controlled trialSurgeryProspective cohort studyKnee painPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To assess the efficacy of autologous bone marrow aspirate (BMA) in reducing pain and improving functionality in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), in comparison with intraarticular corticosteroid injection and genicular nerve block. Methods A prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, comparative, and analytical clinical study was conducted. There were 50 patients with knee OA divided into two groups: an intervention group receiving BMA treatment and a control group undergoing standard corticosteroid articular infiltration and genicular block. Outcome measures were evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC). Results After 6 months, significant pain reduction was noted in the BMA group compared with the control group (p = 0.030). No significant differences were found in stiffness and physical activity scores between the groups. The intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in all assessed WOMAC subcategories pre- and posttreatment. Conclusions Treatment with BMA can significantly reduce pain, potentially leading to an improved functionality, suggesting its potential as a viable therapeutic option for managing knee OA.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.309
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de OrtopediaSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207