Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39572452›Full record

SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2025

Biological augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone marrow aspirate concentrate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Jae Yong Park, James Andrew Ng Hing Cheung, Dominik Todorov, Shin Young Park, Hayeon Lim, Eunjae Shin, Angelina Yoon, Joon Ha

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Orthobiologics in anterior cruciate ligament injuries.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jae Yong ParkFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Ayrton Rd, South Kensington, London, SW7 5NH, UK. jaeyongpark01@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5219-8691
James Andrew Ng Hing CheungFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Ayrton Rd, South Kensington, London, SW7 5NH, UK.ORCID 0009-0008-1226-961X
Dominik TodorovFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Ayrton Rd, South Kensington, London, SW7 5NH, UK.ORCID 0009-0002-4475-2354
Shin Young ParkFaculty of Medicine, Manchester University, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0009-0006-7691-2155
Hayeon LimFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Ayrton Rd, South Kensington, London, SW7 5NH, UK.
Eunjae ShinFaculty of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, South Korea.ORCID 0009-0004-2451-4644
Angelina YoonFaculty of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Joon HaFoothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6864-7167

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBiological augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) is gaining attention for its theoretical potential to enhance postoperative healing and recovery. However, its clinical benefits remain uncertain, and its high cost raises questions about efficacy. Hence, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of BMAC in ACL reconstruction.

methodsOur search included Cochrane, EMBASE, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus databases for RCTs evaluating the use of BMAC in ACL reconstruction. Primary outcomes focused on International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores and Lysholm scores. Secondary outcomes included MRI-related outcomes and postoperative complications. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration), with heterogeneity assessed using Cochrane's Q test and I

results221 patients from five RCTs were included, with 109 (49.3%) receiving BMAC augmentation. Follow-up ranged from 11.05 to 24 months. No significant differences were found in postoperative IKDC scores between the BMAC and control groups at, three, six and 12 months. The BMAC group had significantly higher IKDC scores at 24 months; however, this difference was unlikely to be clinically significant. No significant differences were observed in postoperative Lysholm scores at 12 or 24 months. MRI-related outcomes suggested potential graft recovery improvement with BMAC, and complication rates were comparable between groups.

conclusionIn summary, biological augmentation with BMAC in ACL reconstruction does not significantly improve early patient-reported outcomes but offers potential benefits in graft recovery without increasing complication rates.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionBone Marrow TransplantationHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionBiological augmentationBone marrow aspirate concentratePatient-reported outcomesSystematic review and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID39572452
PMCPMC11703946

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.