Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38902778›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024

Transplantation of three mesenchymal stem cells for knee osteoarthritis, which cell and type are more beneficial? a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Xiyang Chen, Jinglu Zheng, Li Yin, Yikai Li, Hongwen Liu

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Xiyang Chen *Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhongshan, Guangdong Province, China.
Jinglu Zheng *Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhongshan, Guangdong Province, China.
Li Yin *Department of Discipline Construction Office, Panzhihua Central Hospital, Panzhihua, Sichuan Province, China.
Yikai LiDepartment of Traditional Chinese Orthopedics and Traumatology, Center for Orthopaedic Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China. ortho@smu.edu.cn.
Hongwen LiuDepartment of Discipline Construction Office, Panzhihua Central Hospital, Panzhihua, Sichuan Province, China. liuhongwen188@163.com.

Funding

President Foundation of The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University YP202210Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen SZZYSM202108013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn knee osteoarthritis (KOA), treatments involving knee injections of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSC), adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSC), or umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSC) have shown promise in alleviating symptoms. However, which types of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have the best therapeutic outcomes remain uncertain.

methodWe systematically searched PubMed, OVID, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until January 1, 2024. The study evaluated five endpoints: Visual Analog Score (VAS) for Pain, Range of Motion (ROM), Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS), Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and adverse events (ADs). Standard meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed using Stata 16.0.

resultsFifteen studies involving 585 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Standard meta-analysis revealed significant improvements with MSCs in VAS score (P < 0.001), knee ROM (P < 0.001), and WOMAC (P < 0.016) compared to traditional therapy. In the network meta-analysis, autologous MSCs significantly improved VAS score [SMD = 2.94, 95% CI (1.90, 4.56)] and knee ROM [SMD = 0.26, 95% CI (0.08, 0.82)] compared to traditional therapy. Similarly, BM-MSC significantly improved VAS score [SMD = 0.31, 95% CI (0.11, 0.91)] and knee ROM [SMD = 0.26, 95% CI (0.08, 0.82)] compared to hyaluronic acid. However, compared with traditional therapy, autologous or allogeneic MSCs were associated with more adverse reactions [SMD = 0.11, 95% CI (0.02, 0.59)], [SMD = 0.13, 95% CI (0.002, 0.72)]. Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking results, autologous BM-MSC showed the most improvement in ROM and pain relief in KOA patients, UC-MSC (SUCRA 94.1%) were most effective for positive WORMS, and AD-MSC (SUCRA 70.6%) were most effective for WOMAC-positive patients.

conclusionMSCs transplantation effectively treats KOA patients, with autologous BM-MSC potentially offering more excellent benefits.

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationOsteoarthritis, KneeAdipose TissueFemaleHumansMaleMesenchymal Stem CellsMiddle AgedPain MeasurementRange of Motion, ArticularTransplantation, AutologousTreatment OutcomeUmbilical CordKneeMesenchymal stem cellsOsteoarthritisOutcomesStem cell types

Identifiers

PMID38902778
PMCPMC11188250

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.