Effects of Intra-articular Bone Marrow Aspirate Infiltration in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Clinical Study Comparing BMA versus Corticosteroid and Genicular Block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".