Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36209438›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2022

The composition of cell-based therapies obtained from point-of-care devices/systems which mechanically dissociate lipoaspirate: a scoping review of the literature.

Perry Liu, Binay Gurung, Irrum Afzal, Matteo Santin, David H Sochart, Richard E Field, Deiary F Kader, Vipin Asopa

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

8 authors.

Perry LiuSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK. perry.liu@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1375-914X
Binay GurungSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Irrum AfzalSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Matteo SantinCentre for Regenerative Medicine and Devices, School of Applied Sciences, University of Brighton, Brighton, UK.
David H SochartSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Richard E FieldSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Deiary F KaderSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.
Vipin AsopaSouth West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCell-based therapies using lipoaspirate are gaining popularity in orthopaedics due to their hypothesised regenerative potential. Several 'point-of-care' lipoaspirate-processing devices/systems have become available to isolate cells for therapeutic use, with published evidence reporting their clinical relevance. However, few studies have analysed the composition of their 'minimally-manipulated' cellular products in parallel, information that is vital to understand the mechanisms by which these therapies may be efficacious. This scoping review aimed to identify devices/systems using mechanical-only processing of lipoaspirate, the constituents of their cell-based therapies and where available, clinical outcomes.

methodsPRISMA extension for scoping reviews guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases were systematically searched to identify relevant articles until 21

results2895 studies were screened and a total of 15 articles (11 = Level 5 evidence) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 13 unique devices/systems were identified from included studies. All the studies reported cell concentration (cell number regardless of phenotype per millilitre of lipoaspirate) for their devices/systems (range 0.005-21 × 10

conclusionWhen focussing on cell concentration, cell viability and MSC immuno-phenotypic analysis alone, the most effective manual devices/systems were ones using filtration and cutting/mincing. However, it was unclear whether high performance in these categories would translate to improved clinical outcomes. Due to the lack of standardisation and heterogeneity of the data, it was also not possible to draw any reliable conclusions and determine the role of these devices/systems in clinical practice at present. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V Therapeutic.

Indexed as

Adipose-derived stem cellASCCell-based therapyMesenchymal stem cellMicro-fragmented fatMSCNanofatOsteoarthritisStromal vascular fraction

Identifiers

PMID36209438
PMCPMC9548462

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.