ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Increased Cellular Dosage of Bone Marrow Aspiration Concentrate Does Not Translate to Increased Clinical Effectiveness in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Phase I Dose Escalation Study.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mesenchymal stromal cells therapy for remodeling the joint microenvironment: mechanisms, nanotechnology-enhanced strategies, and translation prospects.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
- Adipose-derived and bone marrow aspirate concentrate injections for osteoarthritis: A scoping review.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Obese Patients Do Not Benefit from Bone Marrow Aspiration Concentrate Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study of 68 Patients.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Evolution and Innovations in Bone Marrow Cellular Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Tracing the Historical Trajectory and Contemporary Advances.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), a chronic degenerative disease, significantly impairs quality of life due to pain and mobility limitations. Traditional treatments focus on symptom management without addressing the underlying disease progression, leading to a growing interest in regenerative medicine approaches. Bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), rich in mesenchymal stem cells and growth factors, has shown potential for cartilage repair and symptom relief in KOA. Despite promising outcomes, the optimal BMAC dosage for knee OA treatment remains undetermined. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of varying BMAC dosages in knee OA treatment. Methods: This prospective controlled dose-escalation study involved 75 patients with early-stage knee OA, categorized into three groups based on BMAC dosage administered 10 × 10 Results: Significant clinical improvements in VAS and KOOS scores were noted across all groups at all time points compared to the baseline. However, these improvements did not significantly differ between dosage groups throughout the follow-up period. Adverse effects were minimal and primarily consisted of transient post-injection pain and effusion, with no dose-dependent increase in complications. Conclusion: BMAC treatment for knee OA is safe and demonstrates potential for significant pain relief and functional improvement, irrespective of the dosage administered within the tested range. The lack of significant differences among varying dosages suggests a plateau in therapeutic efficacy beyond a certain threshold. Further research is necessary on the long-term outcomes to optimize the dosing strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.