Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31949437›Full record

ReviewStem cells international2019

Bone Marrow-Derived Cell Therapies to Heal Long-Bone Nonunions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis-Which Is the Best Available Treatment?

Silvia Palombella, Silvia Lopa, Silvia Gianola, Luigi Zagra, Matteo Moretti, Arianna B Lovati

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. New insights in lower limb reconstruction strategies.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Bone healing: Advances in biology and technology.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2021
    Article
  15. Co-transfection withThe Journal of international medical research · 2021
    Article
  16. Bone marrow aspirate clot: A feasible orthobiologic.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2020
    Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Silvia PalombellaCell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.
Silvia LopaCell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0410-5814
Silvia GianolaUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.
Luigi ZagraHip Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.
Matteo MorettiCell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7301-1208
Arianna B LovatiCell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5230-9718

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nonunions represent one of the major indications for clinical settings with stem cell-based therapies. The objective of this research was to systematically assess the current evidence for the efficacy of bone marrow-derived cell-based approaches associated or not with bone scaffolds for the treatment of nonunions. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed) and CENTRAL up to July 2019 for clinical studies focused on the use of cell-based therapies and bone marrow derivatives to treat bone nonunions. Three investigators independently extracted the data and appraised the risk of bias. We analysed 27 studies including a total number of 347 participants exposed to four interventions: bone marrow concentrate (BMAC), BMAC combined with scaffold (BMAC/Scaffold), bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BMSCs), and BMSC combined with scaffold (BMSC/Scaffold). Two controlled studies showed a positive trend in bone healing in favour of BMAC/Scaffold or BMSC/Scaffold treatment against bone autograft, although the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.11, 95% CI -0.05; 0.28). Among single cohort studies, the highest mean pooled proportion of healing rate was reported for BMAC (77%; 95% CI 63%-89%; 107 cases,

Identifiers

PMID31949437
PMCPMC6948316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.