Human umbilical cord-blood-derived mesenchymal stem cell can improve the clinical outcome and Joint space width after high tibial osteotomy

Should I add orthobiologics to my knee osteotomy practice? A systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Orthobiologics has seen a renaissance over the last decade as an adjunct therapy during osteotomy due to the limited inherent regenerative potential of damaged intraarticular tissues.

AIM OR OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to present the latest evidence regarding using orthobiologics with simultaneous high tibial osteotomy (HTO) for knee osteoarthritis. The results of this study may guide surgeons to improve their clinical results and clear the air regarding confusion over whether or not to add orthobiologics to HTO in clinical practice backed by scientific evidence.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

According to PRISMA guidelines a systematic search for relevant literature was performed in the PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases of all studies published in English from January 1990 to May 2023. The following search terms were entered into the title, abstract, and keyword fields: "knee" or "osteotomy" AND "valgus" or "varus" AND "regenerative medicine" or "PRP" or "mesenchymal stem cells" or "stem cells" or "BMAC" or "bone marrow" or "growth factors" or "umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cell" or "stromal vascular fraction". The AMSTAR-2 checklist was used to confirm the quality of the systematic review. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series were included. Studies that reported clinical outcomes in patients treated with knee osteotomy for varus/valgus knee with concomitant adjunction of regenerative treatment [Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), Adipose-derived stem cells (ADSC), Human Umbilical Cord Blood-Derived (HUCBD), Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSC), bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), stromal vascular fraction (SVF)] were included. The outcome measures extracted from the studies were the KOOS score, Lysholm score, Subjective IKDC, WOMAC Score, KSS, Tegner, HSS, radiographic tibiofemoral angle, posterior tibial slope and complications. The current systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO Registry (CRD42023439379).

FINDINGS

Osteotomy for unicompartmental arthritis with adjunction of orthobiologics such as PRP, ADSC, HVCBD, MSC, BMAC, and SVF presents a consistent statistically significant clinical improvement compared to preoperative scores regardless of the treatment modality used and there were no notable complications associated with the use of these novel agents.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Orthobiologics and knee osteotomies could improve outcomes in patients with knee osteoarthritis desiring Knee preservation surgeries. However, only a few studies are available on the topic to conclude anything with certainty, the patients included in the studies could not be disintegrated based on the grade of osteoarthritis (OA), type, dosage and frequency of administration of orthobiologic and type of additional surgical procedures used. Therefore, better-structured RCTs are required to implement this finding into routine Orthopaedic practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

Implantation of hUCB-MSCs generates greater hyaline-type cartilage than microdrilling combined with high tibial osteotomy

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of treating large cartilage defects in knee osteoarthritis using human allogeneic umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cell (hUCB-MSC) implantation or arthroscopic microdrilling as a supplementary cartilage regenerative procedure combined with high tibial osteotomy (HTO).

METHODS

This 1-year prospective comparative study included 25 patients with large, near full-thickness cartilage defects (International Cartilage Repair Society grade ≥ IIIB) in the medial femoral condyles and varus malalignment. Defects were treated with hUCB-MSC implantation or arthroscopic microdrilling combined with HTO. The primary outcomes were pain visual analogue scale and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Secondary outcomes included arthroscopic, histological and magnetic resonance imaging assessments at 1 year.

RESULTS

Fifteen and 10 patients were treated via hUCB-MSC implantation and microdrilling, respectively. Baseline demographics, limb alignment and clinical outcomes did not significantly differ between the groups. Cartilage defects and total restored areas were significantly larger in the hUCB-MSC group (7.2 ± 1.9 vs. 5.2 ± 2.1 cm2, p = 0.023; 4.5 ± 1.4 vs. 3.0 ± 1.6 cm2, p = 0.035). The proportion of moderate-to-strong positive type II collagen staining was significantly higher in the hUCB-MSC group compared to that in the microdrilled group (93.3% vs. 60%, respectively). Rigidity upon probing resembled that of normal cartilage tissue more in the hUCB-MSC group (86.7% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.075). Histological findings revealed a higher proportion of hyaline cartilage in the group with implanted hUCB-MSC (p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

hUCB-MSC implantation showed comparable clinical outcomes to those of microdrilling as supplementary cartilage procedures combined with HTO in the short term, despite the significantly larger cartilage defect in the hUCB-MSC group. The repaired cartilage after hUCB-MSC implantation showed greater hyaline-type cartilage with rigidity than that after microdrilling.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, Prospective Comparative Cohort Study.

Allogeneic umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cell implantation versus microdrilling combined with high tibial osteotomy for cartilage regeneration

This study compared cartilage regeneration outcomes in knee osteoarthritis (OA) using allogeneic human umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cell (hUCB-MSC) implantation and microdrilling with high tibial osteotomy (HTO). Fifty-four patients (60 knees) were included: 24 (27 knees) in the hUCB-MSC group and 30 (33 knees) in the microdrilling group. Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and functional scores at 6, 12, and 24 months compared to baseline. At 24 months, the hUCB-MSC group had significantly improved scores. Arthroscopic assessment at 12 months revealed better cartilage healing in the hUCB-MSC group. In subgroup analysis according to the defect site, hUCB-MSC implantation showed superior cartilage healing for anterior lesions. In conclusion, both treatments demonstrated effectiveness for medial OA. However, hUCB-MSC implantation had better patient-reported outcomes and cartilage regeneration than microdrilling. The study suggests promising approaches for cartilage restoration in large knee defects due to OA.

Biological intra-articular augmentation for osteotomy in knee osteoarthritis: strategies and results : A systematic review of the literature from the ESSKA Orthobiologics Initiative

PURPOSE

To assess whether there is evidence supporting the use of augmentation strategies, either cartilage surgical procedures or injective orthobiologic options, to improve the results of osteotomies in knees with osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed on the PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane databases in January 2023 on osteotomies around the knee associated with augmentation strategies (either cartilage surgical procedures or injective orthobiologic options), reporting clinical, radiological, or second-look/histological outcomes at any follow-up. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the Coleman Methodology Score (CMS).

RESULTS

Out of the 7650 records identified from the databases, 42 articles were included for a total of 3580 patients and 3609 knees treated; 33 articles focused on surgical treatments and 9 on injective treatments performed in association with knee osteotomy. Out of the 17 comparative studies with surgical augmentation, only 1 showed a significant clinical benefit of an augmentation procedure with a regenerative approach. Overall, other studies showed no differences with reparative techniques and even detrimental outcomes with microfractures. Regarding injective procedures, viscosupplementation showed no improvement, while the use of platelet-rich plasma or cell-based products derived from both bone marrow and adipose tissue showed overall positive tissue changes which translated into a clinical benefit. The mean modified CMS score was 60.0 ± 12.1.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence to support the effectiveness of cartilage surgical treatments combined with osteotomies in terms of pain relief and functional recovery of patients affected by OA in misaligned joints. Orthobiologic injective treatments targeting the whole joint environment showed promising findings. However, overall the available literature presents a limited quality with only few heterogeneous studies investigating each treatment option. This ORBIT systematic analysis will help surgeons to choose their therapeutic strategy according to the available evidence, and to plan further and better studies to optimize biologic intra-articular osteotomy augmentation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells promoting knee joint chondrogenesis for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The onset of OA is affected by a variety of factors, which eventually lead to the loss of cartilage in the joints, the formation of osteophytes, the loss of normal knee mobility, and pain and discomfort, which seriously affects the quality of life. HUC-MSCs can promote cartilage production and have been widely used in research in the past decade. This article systematically summarizes that it is well used in basic research and clinical studies to promote inflammatory chondrogenesis in the treatment of OA. Provide a theoretical basis for clinical treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study collected CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed, and articles related to the treatment of OA with HUC-MSCs since their publication, excluding non-basic and clinical studies such as reviews and meta-analysis. A total of 31 basic experimental studies and 12 clinical studies were included. Systematically analyze the effects of HUC-MSCs on inhibiting inflammatory factors, promoting chondrocyte production, and current clinical treatment.

RESULTS

HUC-MSCs can reduce inflammatory factors such as MMP-13, ADAMTS-5, IL-1β, IL-1, IL-6, TNF-α, induced conversion from M1 to M2 in OA to protect cartilage damage and reduce OA inflammation. Synthesize ColII, SOX9, and aggrecan at the same time to promote cartilage synthesis.

CONCLUSION

HUC-MSCs not only have typical stem cell biological characteristics, but also have rich sources and convenient material extraction. Compared with stem cells from other sources, HUC-MSCs have stronger proliferation, differentiation, and immune regulation abilities. Furthermore, there are no ethical issues associated with their use.

SAFETY

Primarily attributed to pain, the majority of individuals experience recovery within 24 h following injection. HUC-MSCs possess the ability to alleviate pain, enhance knee joint function, and potentially postpone the need for surgical intervention in both non-surgical and other cases, making them highly deserving of clinical promotion and application.

Adipose-Derived Stromal Vascular Fractions Are Comparable With Allogenic Human Umbilical Cord Blood-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells as a Supplementary Strategy of High Tibial Osteotomy for Varus Knee Osteoarthritis

Purpose

To compare the clinical, radiologic, and second-look arthroscopic outcomes of high tibial osteotomy (HTO) with stromal vascular fraction (SVF) implantation versus human umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hUCB-MSC) transplantation and identify the association between cartilage regeneration and HTO outcomes.

Methods

Patients treated with HTO for varus knee osteoarthritis between March 2018 and September 2020 were retrospectively identified. In this retrospective study, among 183 patients treated with HTO for varus knee osteoarthritis between March 2018 and September 2020, patients treated with HTO with SVF implantation (SVF group; n = 25) were pair-matched based on sex, age, and lesion size with those who underwent HTO with hUCB-MSC transplantation (hUCB-MSC group; n = 25). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the International Knee Documentation Committee score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Radiological outcomes evaluated were the femorotibial angle and posterior tibial slope. All patients were evaluated clinically and radiologically before surgery and during follow-up. The mean final follow-up periods were 27.8 ± 3.6 (range 24-36) in the SVF group and 28.2 ± 4.1 (range, 24-36) in the hUCB-MSC group (P = 0.690). At second-look arthroscopic surgery, cartilage regeneration was evaluated using the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade.

Results

A total of 17 male and 33 female patients with a mean age of 56.2 years (range, 49-67 years) were included. At the time of second-look arthroscopic surgery (mean, 12.6 months; range, 11-15 months in the SVF group and 12.7 months; range, 11-14 months in the hUCB-MSC group, P = .625), the mean International Knee Documentation Committee score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in each group significantly improved (P < .001 for all), and clinical outcomes at final follow-up further improved in both groups when compared with the values at second-look arthroscopic surgery (P < .05 for all). Overall ICRS grades, which significantly correlated with clinical outcomes, were similar between groups with no significant differences (P = .170 for femoral condyle and P = .442 for tibial plateau). Radiologic outcomes at final follow-up showed improved knee joint alignment relative to preoperative conditions but showed no significant correlation with clinical outcomes or ICRS grade in either group (P > .05 for all).

Conclusions

Improved clinical and radiological outcomes and favorable cartilage regeneration were seen after surgery for varus Knee OA in both SVF and hUCB-MSC groups.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Mesenchymal stem cells in osteoarthritis: The need for translation into clinical therapy

Widely used for cell-based therapy in various medical fields, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) show capacity for anti-inflammatory effects, anti-apoptotic activity, immunomodulation, and tissue repair and regeneration. As such, they can potentially be used to treat osteoarthritis (OA). However, MSCs from different sources have distinct advantages and disadvantages, and various animal models and clinical trials using different sources of MSCs are being conducted in OA regenerative medicine. It is now widely believed that the primary tissue regeneration impact of MSCs is via paracrine effects, rather than direct differentiation and replacement. Cytokines and molecules produced by MSCs, including extracellular vesicles with mRNAs, microRNAs, and bioactive substances, play a significant role in OA repair. This chapter outlines the properties of MSCs and recent animal models and clinical trials involving MSCs-based OA therapy, as well as how the paracrine effect of MSCs acts in OA cartilage repair. Additionally, it discusses challenges and controversies in MSCs-based OA therapy. Despite its limits and unanticipated hazards, MSCs have the potential to be translated into therapeutic therapy for future OA treatment.

Cartilage Regeneration Using Human Umbilical Cord Blood Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: Human umbilical-cord-blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hUCB-MSCs) have recently been used in clinical cartilage regeneration procedures with the expectation of improved regeneration capacity. However, the number of studies using hUCB-MSCs is still insufficient, and long-term follow-up results after use are insufficient, indicating the need for additional data and research. We have attempted to prove the efficacy and safety of hUCB-MSC treatment in a comprehensive analysis by including all subjects with knee articular cartilage defect or osteoarthritis who have undergone cartilage repair surgery using hUCB-MSCs. We conducted a meta-analysis and demonstrated efficacy and safety based on a systematic review. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. For this study, we searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library literature databases up to June 2022. A total of seven studies were included, and quality assessment was performed for each included study using the Newcastle−Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Statistical analysis was performed on the extracted pooled clinical outcome data, and subgroup analyses were completed. Results: A total of 570 patients were included in the analysis. In pooled analysis, the final follow-up International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score showed a significant increase (mean difference (MD), −32.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), −38.32 to −27.32; p < 0.00001) with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 93%, p < 0.00001) compared to the preoperative score. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores at final follow-up were significantly decreased (MD, 30.73; 95% CI, 24.10−37.36; p < 0.00001) compared to the preoperative scores, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 95%, p < 0.00001). The visual analog scale (VAS) score at final follow-up was significantly decreased (MD, 4.81; 95% CI, 3.17−6.46; p < 0.00001) compared to the preoperative score, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 98%, p < 0.00001). Two studies evaluated the modified Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (M-MOCART) score and confirmed sufficient improvement. In a study analyzing a group treated with bone marrow aspiration concentrate (BMAC), there was no significant difference in clinical outcome or M-MOCART score, and the post-treatment International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade increased. Conclusion: This analysis demonstrated the safety, efficacy, and quality of repaired cartilage following hUCB-MSC therapy. However, there was no clear difference in the comparison with BMAC. In the future, comparative studies with other stem cell therapies or cartilage repair procedures should be published to support the superior effect of hUCB-MSC therapy to improve treatment of cartilage defect or osteoarthritis.