Intra-articular bone marrow concentrate injection protocol: short-term efficacy in osteoarthritis

Safety and Efficacy of Bone-Marrow Aspirate Concentrate in Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Evidence

Introduction

Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of disability and morbidity worldwide. It is estimated to affect 9.2% individuals globally with age over 45 years. Conventional treatment modalities have limitations and side-effects. To overcome these limitations, over the last decade, there has been an increased interest in the use of orthobiologics derived from autologous sources including platelet-rich plasma (PRP), bone-marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and adipose tissue derived formulations. This review qualitatively presents the in-vitro, pre-clinical, clinical and on-going clinical studies exploring the safety and efficacy of BMAC for management of hip OA.

Materials and methods

The electronic database search was done through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest and Google Scholar till February 2024. The search terms used were "osteoarthritis" OR "hip osteoarthritis" OR "orthobiologics" OR "efficacy or use of orthobiologic treatment" OR "bone-marrow concentrate" OR "bone-marrow aspirate concentrate", AND "BMAC". The inclusion criteria were clinical studies of any level of evidence written in the English language, published till February 2024, evaluating the safety and efficacy of intra-articular administration of BMAC for the management of hip OA.

Results

A total of 5 studies were included in this review for qualitative data synthesis. The total number of patients who participated in the study was 182, ranging from 4 to 112 in a single study. No adverse events were reported throughout the duration of the study. In addition, intra-articular administration of BMAC led to reduced pain, and improved function and overall quality of life (QoL).

Conclusion

The results from this review demonstrated that administration of BMAC is safe and potentially efficacious in terms of reducing pain, improving function and overall QoL of patients with hip OA in short- and mid-term average follow-up based on the included studies. Nonetheless, more adequately powered, multi-center, prospective, double-blind, non-randomized and randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are warranted to establish long-term safety and efficacy of BMAC for management of hip OA and justify its routine clinical use.

Platelet-rich plasma treatment for talar cartilage repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review the studies regarding to the safety, efficacy and application methods of PRP in promoting the talar cartilage repair.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, Web of Science, OVID and EMBASE to identify studies that compared the clinical efficacy of PRP for talar cartilage repair. Main outcome was the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score for function and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain was the second outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included in this systematic review, including 4 randomized controlled trials, 1 controlled trial, 3 case series and 2 cohort studies. Four RCTs were analyzed using meta-analysis. For all outcomes, statistical results favored PRP group (AOFAS: MD = 7.84; 95% CI= [-0.13, 15.80], I² = 83%, P < 0.01; VAS: MD = 1.86; 95% CI= [0.68, 3.04], I² = 85%, P < 0.01). There were almost no reports of adverse events related to PRP intervention. Subgroup analysis showed that whether PRP was used alone or combined with other treatments could result in high heterogeneity but no more specific factors were identified to contribute to this.

CONCLUSION

PRP is safe and effective for talar cartilage repair. In addition to the standardization of PRP preparation and application, it is necessary to distinguish the effects of PRP used alone or in combination with other treatments. In PRP studies, surgical treatment of talar cartilage repair remains the mainstream. The regulation of PRP in surgical applications are worth exploring. The most relative component is the mesenchymal stem cell because it is the only exposed chondrocyte precursor in the articular cavity whether it is microfracture or cell transplantation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42022360183).

Clinical phase I/II trial of SVF therapy for cartilage regeneration: A cellular therapy with novel 3D MRI imaging for evaluating chondral defect of knee osteoarthritis

Background: The clinical applications of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) therapy for osteoarthritis (OA) have attracted academic and clinical attention. However, data of the effects of stromal vascular fraction therapy on regeneration of degenerated cartilage are limited in the literature. Meanwhile, there is a great need for a simple and non-invasive evaluation method to analyze the changes of joint cartilage qualitatively and quantitatively in clinical trials. This study entitled "stromal vascular fraction Therapy for Human Knee Osteoarthritis" was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov # NCT05019378. Materials and Methods: We designed and conducted a single center, open labeled clinical phase I/II study, and 6 osteoarthritis patients with both knee cartilage defect I-II were enrolled in this study. The two knees of each patient were randomly assigned to autologous stromal vascular fraction treatment group or non-treatment control group to evaluate the safety and therapeutic effect of stromal vascular fraction therapy for human knee osteoarthritis. We have also established a novel protocol to provide 3D MRI imaging for human knee cartilage enabling us to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate cartilage degeneration and regeneration in this study. Results: The qualitative and quantitative evaluation of 3D Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) imaging of knee cartilage demonstrated that the stromal vascular fraction therapy reduced the cartilage defects; and significant increase of cartilage value both in defect cartilage area and whole cartilage area of treated group and significant increase of thickness and area of both femoral and tibia cartilage in vertical sections of the stromal vascular fraction treated Group at 12 and 24 W post treatment in cartilage defect I-II osteoarthritis patients. Conclusion: This clinical phase I/II study indicated that stromal vascular fraction therapy is a safe clinical procedure and provided evidence that the stromal vascular fraction therapy significantly facilitated cartilage regeneration, opening the opportunity to a phase III trial investigating authentic efficacy of the procedure. This study is the first qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the efficacy of autologous stromal vascular fraction cellular therapy on cartilage regeneration. Through early and definite diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis patients, and providing safe and efficient therapy to facilitate cartilage regeneration, we will be able to control or reverse cartilage degeneration and completely change the epidemiology of osteoarthritis worldwide.

Short-Term Efficacy of Using a Novel Low-Volume Bone Marrow Aspiration Technique to Treat Knee Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular bone marrow concentrate (BMC) and aspirate (BMA) injections have been used with mixed results to treat osteoarthritis (OA). Given the various aspiration and concentration methods available for preparing bone marrow, more data are needed to identify the optimal bone marrow harvesting techniques to treat OA.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study examined the effect of using low-volume BMAs harvested using the Marrow Cellution™ (MC) device on 160 patients (262 knees) suffering from pain due to knee OA, KL grades 2-4, that did not respond to conservative treatment. Changes in visual analog scores (VAS) for overall daily activity were examined over a six-month time frame in these patients (63.5 ± 0.97 years of age; 48.1% male). In addition, changes in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC scores) were examined over the same time frame in a smaller subset of patients (95 patients including 172 knees).

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores for overall daily activity 6 months postprocedure in the study population, 7.29 ± 0.27 vs. 3.76 ± 0.34 (p < 0.0001), as well as statistically significant improvements in WOMAC scores, 49.3 ± 4.27 vs. 66.3 ± 4.08 (p < 0.0001). On the individual level, 71% of the cases displayed VAS improvements and 61% of the cases displayed WOMAC improvements that exceeded levels previous studies determined to be the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for knee OA treatments. The improvements in WOMAC scores were also seen in both the WOMAC pain subscore, 52.2 ± 4.39 vs. 72.2 ± 4.36 (p < 0.0001) and the WOMAC function subscore, 51.6 ± 4.67 vs. 69.0 ± 4.36 (p < 0.0001). In addition, the PGIC scores measuring patient satisfaction improved from 4.03 ± 0.26 at 6 weeks postprocedure to 4.65 ± 0.28 at 6 months postprocedure (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Knee OA patients treated with MC BMA intra-articular injections exhibited significant reductions in VAS pain scores and significant improvements in WOMAC scores that exceeded the minimal clinically important difference thresholds. In addition, reductions in VAS pain scores and improvements in WOMAC scores correlated with higher PGIC scores.

Methodological Flaws in Meta-Analyses of Clinical Studies on the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis with Stem Cells: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Conclusions of meta-analyses of clinical studies may substantially influence opinions of prospective patients and stakeholders in healthcare. Nineteen meta-analyses of clinical studies on the management of primary knee osteoarthritis (pkOA) with stem cells, published between January 2020 and July 2021, came to inconsistent conclusions regarding the efficacy of this treatment modality. It is possible that a separate meta-analysis based on an independent, systematic assessment of clinical studies on the management of pkOA with stem cells may reach a different conclusion. (2) Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for clinical studies and meta-analyses of clinical studies on the management of pkOA with stem cells. All clinical studies and meta-analyses identified were evaluated in detail, as were all sub-analyses included in the meta-analyses. (3) Results: The inconsistent conclusions regarding the efficacy of treating pkOA with stem cells in the 19 assessed meta-analyses were most probably based on substantial differences in literature search strategies among different authors, misconceptions about meta-analyses themselves, and misconceptions about the comparability of different types of stem cells with regard to their safety and regenerative potential. An independent, systematic review of the literature yielded a total of 183 studies, of which 33 were randomized clinical trials, including a total of 6860 patients with pkOA. However, it was not possible to perform a scientifically sound meta-analysis. (4) Conclusions: Clinicians should interpret the results of the 19 assessed meta-analyses of clinical studies on the management of pkOA with stem cells with caution and should be cautious of the conclusions drawn therein. Clinicians and researchers should strive to participate in FDA and/or EMA reviewed and approved clinical trials to provide clinically and statistically valid efficacy.

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Is Equivalent to Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis at 2 Years: A Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMC) are being used clinically as therapeutic agents for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of BMC and PRP on pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis up to 24 months after injection. It was hypothesized that patients receiving BMC would have better sustained outcomes than those receiving PRP.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A total of 90 participants aged between 18 and 80 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grades 1-3) were randomized into 2 study groups: PRP and BMC. Both groups completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire before and 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after a single intra-articular injection of leukocyte-rich PRP or BMC. A linear mixed-effects model was performed to quantify the effects over time and the difference between the groups. This model has the random effect for time to assess the extent in which the change over time differs from one person to another.

RESULTS

An overall 84 patients completed questionnaires from baseline to 12 months; however, 17 patients (n = 9; PRP group) were lost to follow-up at 18 months and 25 (n = 13; PRP group) at 24 months. There were no statistically significant differences in IKDC (P = .909; 95% CI, -6.26 to 7.03) or WOMAC (P = .789; 95% CI, -6.26 to 4.77) scores over time between the groups. Both groups had significantly improved IKDC (P < .001; 95% CI, 0.275-0.596) and WOMAC (P = .001; 95% CI, -0.41 to -0.13) scores from baseline to 24 months after the injection. These improvements plateaued at 3 months and were sustained for 24 months after the injection, with no difference between PRP and BMC at any time point.

CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of osteoarthritis, PRP and BMC performed similarly out to 24 months. BMC was not superior to PRP.

REGISTRATION

NCT03289416 (ClincalTrials.gov identifier).

Bone marrow aspirate concentrate versus platelet-rich plasma for treating knee osteoarthritis: a one-year non-randomized retrospective comparative study

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a debilitating condition affecting human body biomechanics and quality of life. Current standard care for knee OA leads to trivial improvement and entails multiple adverse effects or complications. Recently, investigational cell therapies injected intra-articularly, such as bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP), have shown safety and therapeutic potency providing patients with pain relief. In the current retrospective comparative study, we investigated the differences in pain and functional improvements in patients with symptomatic knee OA receiving intra-articular injections of BMAC vs PRP.

Methods

Pain and functionality scores were measured at baseline and at different time points post-injection over 12 months, using 3 self-administered, clinically validated questionnaires: the visual analogue scale (VAS) for assessing pain intensity, the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) for evaluating functionality and knee-related quality of life, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) for evaluating physical function. The repeated-measures general linear model with Sidak test for pairwise comparisons was used to investigate the influence of the treatment on the score evolution within groups (between baseline and each time point) and between groups (overall).

Results

The BMAC group (n = 26 knees) significantly improved in VAS, KOOS, and WOMAC scores between baseline and 12 months (57.4, 75.88, and 73.95% mean score improvement, respectively). In contrast, the PRP group (n = 13 knees) witnessed nonsignificant improvement in all scores. BMAC, in comparison to PRP, induced significant improvement in outcomes by 29.38% on the VAS scale, 53.89% on the KOOS scale, and 51.71% on the WOMAC scale (P < .002, P < .01, P < .011, respectively).

Conclusions

Intra-articular autologous BMAC injections are safe, effective in treating pain, and ameliorate functionality in patients with symptomatic knee OA to a greater extent than PRP injections.

Graphical abstract

Intra-articular autologous BMAC therapy is safe and provides more relief to patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis compared to PRP therapy.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04910-5.

Intra-articular injection of autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the thumb first carpometacarpal joint: A pilot study

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the thumb first carpometacarpal joint. Injections were carried out in 27 thumbs. According to the Dell classification, there were 2 stage I, 11 stage II, 13 stage III and 1 stage IV cases. The bone marrow was aspirated from the iliac crest, concentrated by centrifugation, and injected under fluoroscopic control into the pathological thumb. Results were assessed at a mean 16 months' follow-up (range, 8-26). Clinical evaluation comprised QuickDASH and PRWE scores, pain at rest on a numerical analog scale (NAS), and thumb column abduction on goniometry. QuickDASH and PRWE scores were 59 (range, 27-82) and 88 range, 37-125) preoperatively and 29 (range, 0-64) and 50 (range, 1-99) postoperatively, respectively. Mean pain at rest on NAS improved from 7 (range, 1-10) to 4 (range, 0-9). Thumb abduction improved by a mean 18° over preoperative data. No postoperative complications were found. Two patients had to be operated on for inefficacy of injection. This is the first article presenting the effect of an intra-articular injection of BMAC in the thumb first carpometacarpal joint and the results were encouraging. Many patients showed improved quality of life and pain relief. These injections appear to be an effective means of postponing surgery.

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate versus Platelet Rich Plasma or Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

Background: In the last decade, regenerative therapies have become one of the leading disease modifying options for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Still, there is a lack of trials with a direct comparison of different biological treatments. Our aim was to directly compare clinical outcomes of knee injections of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate (BMAC), Platelet-rich Plasma (PRP), or Hyaluronic acid (HA) in the OA treatment. Methods: Patients with knee pain and osteoarthritis KL grade II to IV were randomized to receive a BMAC, PRP, and HA injection in the knee. VAS, WOMAC, KOOS, and IKDC scores were used to establish baseline values at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. All side effects were reported. Results: A total of 175 patients with a knee osteoarthritis KL grade II-IV were randomized; 111 were treated with BMAC injection, 30 with HA injection, and 34 patients with PRP injection. There were no differences between these groups when considering KL grade, BMI, age, or gender. There were no serious side effects. The mean VAS scores after 3, 7, 14, and 21 days showed significant differences between groups with a drop of VAS in all groups but with a difference in the BMAC group in comparison to other groups (p < 0.001). There were high statistically significant differences between baseline scores and those after 12 months (p < 0.001) in WOMAC, KOOS, KOOS pain, and IKDC scores, and in addition, there were differences between these scores in the BMAC group in comparison with other groups, except for the PRP group in WOMAC and the partial IKDC score. There were no differences between the HA and PRP groups, although PRP showed a higher level of clinical improvement. Conclusions: Bone marrow aspirate concentrate, Leukocyte rich Platelet Rich Plasma, and Hyaluronic acid injections are safe therapeutic options for knee OA and provide positive clinical outcomes after 12 months in comparison with findings preceding the intervention. BMAC could be better in terms of clinical improvements in the treatment of knee OA than PRP and HA up to 12 months. PRP provides better outcomes than HA during the observation period, but these results are not statistically significant. More randomized controlled trials and high quality comparative studies are needed for direct correlative conclusions.

Short-term outcomes after pure bone marrow aspirate injection for severe knee osteoarthritis: a case series

Background: Bone marrow aspiration (BMA) is among a group of autologous cell-based therapies currently being explored to treat osteoarthritis (OA). Materials & methods: This retrospective case study observed ten patients (13 knees) with severe knee OA who failed extensive conservative treatment and were treated with BMA injection using a novel, pure bone marrow aspiration (pBMA) technique. Results: No adverse events were reported. More than 50% reduction in the visual analog scale score for pain was observed at 2- and 12-weeks post-procedure, showing statistical significance. At 64 ± 26 weeks post-procedure, average knee pain remained significantly less than pre-procedure. Conclusion: Therefore, patients with severe knee OA may achieve significant relief after a BMA injection obtained using this pure bone marrow aspiration technique.

Bone marrow concentrate injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis: evidence from preclinical findings to the clinical application

Purpose

To investigate the available literature on the use of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and summarize the current evidence supporting its potential for the injective treatment of joints affected by osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted on three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) in April 2020, using the following string: “((bone marrow concentrate) OR (BMC) OR (bone marrow aspirate concentrate) OR (BMAC)) AND (osteoarthritis)”, and inclusion criteria: clinical and preclinical (animal) studies of any level of evidence, written in English language, and evaluating the intra-articular or subchondral use of BMAC for the injective treatment of OA joints.

Results

The publication trend remarkably increased over time. A total of 22 studies were included in the qualitative data synthesis: four preclinical studies and 18 clinical studies, for a total number of 4626 patients. Safety was documented by all studies, with a low number of adverse events. An overall improvement in pain and function was documented in most of the studies, but the clinical studies present significant heterogeneity, few patients, short-term follow-up, and overall poor methodology.

Conclusion

There is a growing interest in the field of BMAC injections for the treatment of OA, with promising results in preclinical and clinical studies in terms of safety and effectiveness. Nevertheless, the current knowledge is still preliminary. Preclinical research is still needed to optimize BMAC use, as well as high-level large controlled trials to better understand the real potential of BMAC injections for the treatment of patients affected by OA.

Bone marrow-derived products: A classification proposal - bone marrow aspirate, bone marrow aspirate concentrate or hybrid?

Degenerative musculoskeletal disorders are one of the top causes of pain and disability in the adult population. Current available alternatives to mitigate symptoms include conservative treatments such as the administration of pharmacological agents and an educative approach towards lifestyle modification. The use of certain analgesics, such as opiates and corticosteroids, delivers short term results but do not address the etiological source of pain and disability. Also, prolonged use of such medications may cause additional complications. Therefore, the demand for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration has led to an alternative approach referred to as "orthobiologics". This alternative is based on cellular and molecular components capable of inducing and promoting tissue repair. Bone marrow (BM) aspirate (BMA) and concentrate are well-known orthobiologics used to treat musculoskeletal conditions. Orthobiologics derived from the BM have been discussed in the literature; however, the lack of standardization regarding collection and processing protocols presents a challenge for generalization of study outcomes and determination of efficacy. Since BM-derived orthobiologics have not yet been classified, to our knowledge, this manuscript proposes the ACH classification system, which speaks to BMA (A), BMA and concentrate (C) and hybrid (H), which combines A and C. This classification proposes and describes 8 parameters that are relevant for the quality of biological products. The more parameters used would imply greater characterization and complexity of the evaluation of the biological product used. The ACH classification envisages a necessary contribution to the comprehension of both clinical procedures and research outcomes, ultimately ushering in a standardization of best practice.

Current perspectives in stem cell therapies for osteoarthritis of the knee

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are emerging as an attractive option for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee joint, due to their marked disease-modifying ability and chondrogenic potential. MSCs can be isolated from various organ tissues, such as bone marrow, adipose tissue, synovium, umbilical cord blood, and articular cartilage with similar phenotypic characteristics but different proliferation and differentiation potentials. They can be differentiated into a variety of connective tissues such as bone, adipose tissue, cartilage, intervertebral discs, ligaments, and muscles. Although several studies have reported on the clinical efficacy of MSCs in knee OA, the results lack consistency. Furthermore, there is no consensus regarding the proper cell dosage and application method to achieve the optimal effect of stem cells. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the characteristics of various type of stem cells in knee OA, especially MSCs. Moreover, we summarize the clinical issues faced during the application of MSCs.

Orthobiologics for the Hip Region: A Narrative Review

Management of hip region disorders is challenging. Orthobiologic treatments including platelet rich plasma (PRP), mesenchymal stem cells, and amniotic injectables have gained popularity as promising treatments despite a lack of robust evidence for their effectiveness. We review rationale and current evidence for orthobiologics for three common hip region conditions: hip osteoarthritis, gluteal tendinopathy, and proximal hamstring tendinopathy. Overall, the current state of evidence is extremely limited for orthobiologic treatments and is predominantly relevant to PRP injections. There is currently a lack of data to support the use of mesenchymal stem cells or amniotic injectables in these conditions of the hip.

Treating hand and foot osteoarthritis using a patient's own blood: A systematic review and meta-analysis of platelet-rich plasma

Background

This study summarizes all literature investigating platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the hands and feet.

Materials & methods

This is a PRISMA compliant systematic review of 7 databases and includes a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on pain and function.

Results

Nine articles were included in the review. Meta-analysis of 4 RCTs shows PRP significantly improves pain and function versus control. More results are significant at longer duration follow-up.

Conclusions

PRP improves pain and function of osteoarthritis. Heterogeneity and risk-of-bias limit current data, requiring more RCTs to determine any regenerative potential of PRP.

Prospero Systematic Review Registration Number

136582.

Minimally Manipulated Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence

Background

The use of laboratory-expanded mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is subject to several restrictions, resulting in “minimal manipulation” methods becoming the current most popular strategy to increase the use of MSCs in an orthopaedic practice. The aim of the present systematic review is to assess the clinical applications of “minimally” manipulated MSCs, either as bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) or as stromal vascular fraction (SVF), in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

A systematic review of three databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar) was performed using the following keywords: “Knee Osteoarthritis” with “(Bone marrow aspirate) OR (bone marrow concentrate)” or with “(adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells) OR (adipose derived stromal cells) OR (stromal vascular fraction) OR (SVF)” as either keywords or MeSH terms. The reference lists of all retrieved articles were further reviewed for identification of potentially relevant studies.

Results

Twenty-three papers were included in the final analysis (10 on BMAC and 13 on SVF). Of these, only 4 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Bias risk evaluation, performed using a modified Coleman score, revealed an overall poor quality of the studies. In terms of clinical application, despite the apparent safety of minimally manipulated MSCs and the short-term positive clinical outcomes associated with their use, clinicians reported different preparation and administration methods, ranging from single intra-articular injections to intraosseous applications to administration in combination with other surgical procedures.

Conclusions

The available literature is undermined by both the lack of high-quality studies and the varied clinical settings and different protocols reported in the few RCTs presently published. This prevents any recommendation on the use of either product in a clinical practice. Nevertheless, the use of minimally manipulated MSCs (in the form of BMAC or SVF) has been shown to be safe and have some short-term beneficial effects.

Functional Outcomes Following Microfragmented Adipose Tissue Versus Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Injections for Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis

This study aimed to determine whether autologous orthobiologic tissue source affects pain and functional outcomes in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) who received microfragmented adipose tissue (MFAT) or bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) injection. We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from patients who received BMAC or MFAT injection for symptomatic knee OA. Patients completed baseline and follow-up surveys. Each survey included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire, Emory Quality of Life (EQOL) questionnaire, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain. The follow-up responses were compared with baseline for all patients and between BMAC and MFAT groups. A total of 110 patients met inclusion criteria, with 76 patients (BMAC 41, MFAT 35) and 106 knees (BMAC 58, MFAT 48) having appropriate follow-up data. The BMAC group included 17 females and 24 males, with a mean age of 59 ± 11 years. The MFAT group included 23 females and 12 males, with a mean age of 63 ± 11 years. Minimum follow-up time was 0.5 years. Mean follow-up time was 1.80 ± 0.88 years for BMAC and 1.09 ± 0.49 years for MFAT. Both groups had significant improvement in EQOL, VAS, and all KOOS parameters preprocedure versus postprocedure (p < .001). There was not a significant difference when comparing postprocedure scores between groups (p = .09, .38, .63, .94, .17, .15, .70, respectively). These data demonstrate significant improvement in pain and function with both MFAT and BMAC injections in patients with symptomatic knee OA without a significant difference in improvement when comparing the two autologous tissue sources. Stem Cells Translational Medicine 2019;8:1149-1156.

Injective mesenchymal stem cell-based treatments for knee osteoarthritis: from mechanisms of action to current clinical evidences

PURPOSE

Osteoarthritis (OA) represents a relevant social and economic burden worldwide. "Mesenchymal stem cells" or, as recently proposed, "medicinal signaling cells" (MSCs) have been recently introduced as injective treatments for OA with the aim of restoring joint homeostasis. The aim of this review is to provide the reader with the tools necessary to interpret the currently available clinical data, focusing on the MSC mechanisms of action which might help to clarify what we should expect from this treatment.

METHODS

Clinical studies reporting MSC injections for the treatment of knee OA, either freshly isolated or culture-expanded cells, have been included and commented in relation to the supposed therapeutic effect that MSCs might exert giving their supposed mode of actions.

RESULTS

The majority of the studies reports significant improvements in terms of pain and knee function compared to baseline values, up to 24 months of follow-up. Although these data support the expected therapeutic effect of this therapy giving the features of these cells, only 14% of the studies present a control group and more than one-third of them report the results on less than ten patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the constant presence of positive and satisfactory results in the studies analyzed, the complexity of MSC metabolism and related therapeutic effects as well as the weakness of most of the studies do not allow withdrawing definitive conclusions about the superiority of one tissue source over another, as well as about the best cell dose and the long-term durability of the effects of these procedures. Given the high potential value of these therapies in the treatment of OA, further studies accurately designed, carefully defining the type of patients to be included and pursuing minimal standard requirements in terms of follow-up, number of patients, and types of measurements should be conducted to finally assess the efficacy of MSC-based injective treatments.

Effectiveness of a single intra-articular bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) injection in patients with grade 3 and 4 knee osteoarthritis

Aim

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of an intra-articular injection of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) as a treatment option for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Materials and methods

Between June 2014 and February 2017, data from 233 patients with knee osteoarthritis treated with BMAC injection at a single center, were retrospectively evaluated. Only patients with idiopathic osteoarthritis were included. Exclusion criteria were post-traumatic osteoarthritis, previous knee surgery, age less than 50 years old or more than 85 years old, active infection, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, rheumatological or other systemic disease, malignancy, or treatment with immunosuppressive drugs. Bone marrow from the iliac crest was aspirated/concentrated with a standardized technique using a single-spin manual method. Patients were evaluated before and after the procedure, using the numeric pain scale (NPS) and Oxford knee score (OKS). Mean follow-up period was 11 months, range (6–30 months).

Results

A total of 121 of 233 patients had completed data as previously defined and were included in the statistical analysis. There were 85 females and 36 males, with mean age 70 years (range 50–85). Compared to baseline, the mean NPS decreased from 8.33 to 4.49 (p < 0.001) and the mean OKS increased from 20.20 to 32.29 (P < 0.001) at final follow-up. There were no complications.

Conclusion

A single intra-articular injection of BMAC is a safe and reliable procedure that results in clinical improvement of knee OA.

Effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells for treating patients with knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis toward the establishment of effective regenerative rehabilitation

This systematic review with a meta-analysis aimed to summarize the current evidence of the effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to examine whether rehabilitation is an effect modifier of the effect estimate of MSC treatment. A literature search yielded 659 studies, of which 35 studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 2385 patients; mean age: 36.0-74.5 years). The meta-analysis results suggested that MSC treatment through intra-articular injection or arthroscopic implantation significantly improved knee pain (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.94, -0.96), self-reported physical function (SMD: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.92), and cartilage quality (SMD: -1.99; 95% CI: -3.51, -0.47). However, the MSC treatment efficacy on cartilage volume was limited (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI: -0.19, 1.16). Minor adverse events (knee pain or swelling) were reported with a wide-ranging prevalence of 2-60%; however, no severe adverse events occurred. The evidence for these outcomes was "very low" to "low" according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system because of the poor study design, high risk of bias, large heterogeneity, and wide 95% CI of the effects estimate. Performing rehabilitation was significantly associated with better SMD for self-reported physical function (regression coefficient: 0.881, 95% CI: 0.049, 1.712; P = 0.039). We suggest that more high quality randomized controlled trials with consideration of the potential rehabilitation-driven clinical benefit would be needed to facilitate the foundation of effective MSC treatment and regenerative rehabilitation for patients with knee OA.

Reporting Standards in Clinical Studies Evaluating Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review of clinical studies evaluating bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) in the treatment of musculoskeletal pathology to compare levels of reporting with recently published minimum standards.

METHODS

A systematic review of the clinical literature from August 2002 to August 2017 was performed. Human clinical studies published in English and involving the administration of BMAC for musculoskeletal applications were included. Studies evaluating non-concentrated preparations of bone marrow aspirate or preparations of laboratory cultured cells were excluded. Studies evaluating the treatment of dental or maxillofacial conditions were excluded. Similarly, in vitro studies, editorials, letters to the editor, and reviews were excluded. Levels of reporting were compared with previously published minimum standards agreed on through an international Delphi consensus process.

RESULTS

Of 1,580 studies identified on the initial search, 46 satisfied the criteria for inclusion. Considerable deficiencies in reporting of key variables including the details of BMAC preparation and composition were noted. Studies reported information on only 42% (range, 25%-60%) of the variables included within established minimum reporting standards. No study provided adequate information to enable the precise replication of preparation protocols and accurate characterization of the BMAC formulation delivered.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that all existing clinical studies in the literature evaluating BMAC for orthopaedic or sports medicine applications are limited by inadequate reporting of both preparation protocols and composition. Deficient reporting of the variables that may critically influence outcomes precludes interpretation, prevents other researchers from reproducing experimental conditions, and makes comparisons across studies difficult. We encourage the adoption of emerging minimum reporting standards for clinical studies evaluating the use of mesenchymal stem cells in orthopaedics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

Facilitated recruitment of mesenchymal stromal cells by bone marrow concentrate and platelet rich plasma

BACKGROUND

Biologics containing growth factors are frequently used to enhance healing after musculoskeletal injuries. One mechanism of action is thought to be though the ability of biologics to induce homing and migration of endogenous mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to a target tissue. However, the ability of biologics to stimulate chemotaxis (directed migration of cells) and chemokinesis (increase rate of cell migration) of MSCs is unknown.

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to directly compare the ability of biologics including platelet rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow concentrate (BMC) to induce MSC migration. The hypothesis was that leukocyte-low platelet rich plasma (Llo PRP) would induce migration to a greater extent than leukocyte-high platelet rich plasma (Lhi PRP) or BMC.

METHODS

Bone marrow-derived MSCs were isolated from 8 horses. Migration of MSCs toward a biologic (BMC, Llo PRP, and Lhi PRP) or the positive control platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) was continuously traced and measured for 24hrs using time-lapse microscopy and a microfluidics device. Cell migration, chemotaxis and chemokinesis were determined by measurements of displacement, number of cells migrated, and cell flux.

RESULTS

All biologics resulted in a significantly greater percentage of MSCs migrated compared to the positive control (PDGF). MSCs migrated further toward BMC compared to Llo PRP. Cell migration, measured as cell flux, was greater toward BMC and Lhi PRP than Llo PRP.

CONCLUSION

The biologics BMC and Lhi PRP elicit greater chemotaxis and chemokinesis of MSCs than Llo PRP. However, all biologics recruited the same number of MSCs suggesting that differences in other regenerative effects, such as growth factor concentration, between biologics should be strongly considered when choosing a biologic for treatment of musculoskeletal injuries. The results of this study have the potential to reduce the need, risks, and costs associated with MSC culture and delivery.

Variability in the Preparation, Reporting, and Use of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate in Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Orthopaedic Literature

BACKGROUND

Interest in the therapeutic potential of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) has grown exponentially. However, comparisons among studies and their processing methods are challenging because of inconsistent reporting of protocols, as well as poor characterization of the composition of the initial bone marrow aspirate and of the final products delivered. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the level of reporting related to the protocols used for BMAC preparation and the composition of BMAC utilized in the treatment of musculoskeletal diseases in published clinical studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1980 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were human clinical trials, English language, and manuscripts that reported on the use of BMAC in musculoskeletal conditions.

RESULTS

After a comprehensive review of the 986 identified articles, 46 articles met the inclusion criteria for analysis. No study provided comprehensive reporting that included a clear description of the preparation protocol that could be used by subsequent investigators to repeat the method. Only 14 (30%) of the studies provided quantitative metrics of the composition of the BMAC final product.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting of BMAC preparation protocols in clinical studies was highly inconsistent and studies did not provide sufficient information to allow the protocol to be reproduced. Moreover, comparison of the efficacy and yield of BMAC products is precluded by deficiencies in the reporting of preparation methods and composition. Future studies should contain standardized and stepwise descriptions of the BMAC preparation protocol, and the composition of the BMAC delivered, to permit validating and rationally optimizing the role of BMAC in musculoskeletal care.