Skip to main content

Table 4 Clinical outcomes of studies utilising bone marrow aspirate concentrate

From: Intra-articular injection of orthobiologics in patients undergoing high tibial osteotomy for knee osteoarthritis is safe and effective – a systematic review

Study

Type of Osteotomy Performed

Intervention

Number of Patients in Intervention Group

Number of Patients in Control Group

Number of Patients undergoing second-look Arthroscopy

Pre-OP Koshino Staging

Post-OP Koshino Staging

Pre-OP ICRS-CRA

Post-OP ICRS-CRA

Pre-OP IKDC Score

Post-OP IKDC Score

Pre-OP WOMAC Score

Post-OP WOMAC score

Jin et al, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2021 [15]

HTO

Microfracture with BMAC

48

43

64/91 at mean 2 years post-op

Not Reported

Group I (n = 31) vs Group II (n = 33):

Regeneration Stage:

Stage A: 5 (16.1%) v 2 (6.1%)

Stage B: 16 (51.6%) v 15 (45.5%)

Stage C-1: 9 (29.0%) v 14 (42.4%)

Stage C-2: 1 (3.2%) v 2 (6.1%)

Group I (n = 43) v Group II (n = 48)

Grade III: 38 v 41

Grade IV: 5 v 7

Group I (n = 31) vs Group II (n = 33)

Grade I: 0 v 1

Grade II: 12 v 18

Grade III: 10 v 11

Group I (n = 43) v Group II (n = 48):

33.7 ± 9.4 vs 35.3 ± 12.6

Group I (n = 43) v Group II (n = 48):

At 1 year: 67.0 ± 10.6 vs 71.3 ± 11.2

Group I (n = 43) vs II (n = 48)

47.5 ± 10.4 vs 46.9 ± 13.9

Group I (n = 43) vs II (n = 48)

20.4 ± 9.7 vs 16.3 ± 9.8

Yang et al, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2021 [25]

HTO

BMAC (55 Patients)

hUCB-MSCs (55 Patients)

110

N.A

81/110 at mean 17 months post-op

Not Reported

BMAC (n = 37) v hUCB-MSC (n = 44)

Stage A: 4 (10.8%) v 0 (0%)

Stage B: 12 (32.4%) v 12 (27.3%)

Stage C: 21 (56.8%) v 32 (72.7%)

BMAC (n = 55) vs hUBC-MSC (n = 55)

Grade III: 5v3

Grade IV: 50 v 52

BMAC (n = 37) v hUBC-MSC (n = 44)

Grade I: 1 v 4

Grade II: 20 v 30

Grade III: 11 v 10

Grade IV: 5 v 0

BMAC (n = 55) v hUCB-MSC (n = 55)

36.2 ± 3.0 v 35.4 ± 5.5

BMAC (n = 55) v hUCB-MSC (n = 55)

At latest follow-up (mean 33.0 months): 72.8 ± 5.8 v 73.3 ± 9.8

Not Reported

Not reported

Lee et al, Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 2021 [24]

HTO

BMAC (42 Patients)

hUCB-MSCs (32 Patients)

74

N.A

74/74 after minimum 1 year post-op

Not Reported

Not reported

Not Reported

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients)I: 1 v 6

II: 18 v 20

III: 12 v 6

IV: 11 v 0

Not reported

Not Reported

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients)43.9 ± 12.7 v 45.2 ± 8.8

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients) At latest follow-up:23.4 ± 11.6 v 19.5 ± 15.58

D’Elia et al, Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia 2015 [19]

HTO

PRP with BMAC

11

14

N.A

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Study

Pre-OP KSS Score

Post-OP KSS Score

Pre-OP KOOS Score

Post-OP KOOS Score

Pre-OP SF-36 Score

Post-OP SF-36 Score

Pre-OP Tegner Activity Scale

Post-OP Tegner Activity Scale

Pre-OP HSS Score

Post-OP HSS Score

Pre-OP VAS

Post-OP VAS

Jin et al, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2021 [15]

Group I (n = 43) vs II (n = 48)

Pain Subscale: 27.0 ± 8.5 vs 27.2 ± 7.6 Function Subscale: 60.6 ± 11.0 vs 58.9 ± 13.3

Group I (n = 43) vs II (n = 48) At Final followup (Mean 22.8 months for Group I and 20.3 months for Group II)

Pain Subscale: 39.7 ± 6.5 vs 42.6 ± 7.2 Function Subscale: 88.8 ± 8.2 vs 91.0 ± 10.2

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Yang et al, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 2021 [25]

Not Reported

Not Reported

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55)

1)Pain:

42.3 ± 3.7 v 41.4 ± 6.5 2)Symptoms:40.9 ± 5.1 v 39.5 ± 6.9 3)ADL

52.0 ± 7.1 v 51.5 ± 8.4

4)Sports and rec

23.8 ± 7.0 v 23.7 ± 9.2 5)QOL

31.1 ± 4.8 v 29.8 ± 6.3

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55) At latest follow-up (mean 33.0 months):

1)Pain: 81.7 ± 6.4 v 83.1 ± 8.3

2)Symptoms:

79.2 ± 7.5 v 79.4 ± 8.8

3)ADL: 82.4 ± 5.0 v 83.1 ± 5.8

4)Sports and rec:

62.0 ± 11.9 v 63.2 ± 10.7

5)QOL: 72.4 ± 6.8 v 73.8 ± 8.7

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55)

Physical Component:

42.2 ± 3.5 v 41.5 ± 5.5

Mental Component: 57.2 ± 8.0 v 57.0 ± 9.2

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55) At latest follow-up (mean 33.0 months)

Physical Component: 64.7 ± 5.9 v 65.4 ± 7.9Mental Component: 64.0 ± 8.7 v 64.7 ± 8.8

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55)

2.3 ± 0.9 v 2.2 ± 0.8

BMAC (n = 55) v hUBC (n = 55)

At latest follow-up (mean 33.0 months)

4.0 ± 0.5 v 4.1 ± 0.5

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Lee et al, Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 2021 [24]

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients) Pain Subscale: 30.8 ± 11.0 v 31.6 ± 10.4

Function Subscale: 62.3 ± 11.9 v 63.1 ± 11.2

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients) At latest follow-up Pain Subscale:

40.6 ± 9.1 v 42.8 ± 7.9

Function Subscale:

80.1 ± 15.0 v 82.4 ± 15.5

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients)

52.9 ± 12.9 v 56.1 ± 10.6

BMAC (n = 42 Patients) v hUCB-MSC (n = 32 Patients) At latest follow-up

79.2 ± 11.5 v 84.6 ± 15.5

Not Reported

Not Reported

D’Elia et al, Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia 2015 [19]

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Not Reported

Control (n = 14) v PRP-BMAC (n = 11)

24 h post-op: 5.1 ± 2.9 v 4.4 ± 2.7

  1. ICRS-CRA International Cartilage Repair Society – Cartilage Assessment, IKDC International Knee Documentation Committee, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, KSS Knee Society Score, KOOS Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, SF-36 Short Form 36, HSS Hospital for Special Surgery, VAS Visual Analogue Scale, HTO High Tibial Osteotomy, BMAC Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate, ADL Activities of Daily Living, QOL Quality of Life, hUCB-MSCs Human Umbilical Cord Blood-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells