Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38919468›Full record

ReviewJOR spine2024

A comprehensive review of cell transplantation and platelet-rich plasma therapy for the treatment of disc degeneration-related back and neck pain: A systematic evidence-based analysis.

Jordy Schol, Shota Tamagawa, Tibo Nico Emmie Volleman, Muneaki Ishijima, Daisuke Sakai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JOR spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Platelet-rich plasma and stem cell therapies for spondylosis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors.

Jordy ScholDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Tokai University School of Medicine Isehara Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5489-2591
Shota TamagawaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Tokai University School of Medicine Isehara Japan.
Tibo Nico Emmie VollemanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Tokai University School of Medicine Isehara Japan.
Muneaki IshijimaDepartment of Medicine for Orthopaedics and Motor Organ Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Daisuke SakaiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery Tokai University School of Medicine Isehara Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4189-9270

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain predominate as the primary causes of disability. Cell- and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) products are potential therapies with clinical trials and reviews promoting their efficacy. Nonetheless, they frequently disregard the clinical significance of reported improvements. In this systematic review, the effectuated improvements in pain, disability, quality of life (QoL), and radiographic images are comprehensively described and scored on their clinical significance. An electronic database literature search was conducted on July 2023 for in-human assessment of cell or PRP products to alleviate discogenic pain. Papers were screened on quantitative pain, disability, QoL, radiographic improvements, and safety outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed through MINORS and Cochrane Source of Bias tools. Reported outcomes were obtained, calculated, and assessed to meet minimal clinically important difference (MCID) standards. From 7623 screened papers, a total of 80 articles met the eligibility criteria, presenting 68 specific studies. These presented at least 1974 treated patients. Overall, cell/PRP injections could alleviate pain and disability, resulting in MCID for pain and disability in up to a 2-year follow-up, similar to those observed in patients undergoing spinal fusion. Included trials predominantly presented high levels of bias, involved heterogeneous study designs, and only a minimal number of randomized controlled trials. Nonetheless, a clear clinically significant impact was observed for cell- and PRP-treated cohorts with overall good safety profiles. These results highlight a strong therapeutic potential but also underline the need for future cost-effectiveness assessments to determine the benefits of cell/PRP treatments.

Indexed as

back paincell therapyclinical significanceclinical trialdiscogenic painneck painplatelet‐rich plasmaregenerative medicinespinesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38919468
PMCPMC11196836

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.