ArticleInterventional pain medicine2025
Bone marrow concentrate intradiscal injection for chronic discogenic low back pain: A double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolving Landscape of Regenerative Therapies: Cell-Based and Cell-Free Approaches for Chronic Low Back Pain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Intra-articular cervical facet joint corticosteroid injections in patients with increased peri-facet MRI STIR signal. A prospective, multi-center case series.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- Stem Cells and Intervertebral Disc Regeneration Overview-What They Can and Can't Do.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
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
Summary of background: The field of orthobiologics has attempted to address the challenge of discogenic low back pain (LBP). Research in areas such as stem cells, platelet-rich plasma, and specific growth factor injections has seen limited success. Objective: The purpose of this trial was to determine the efficacy of a single intradiscal bone marrow concentrate (BMC) injection on pain and function for chronic discogenic LBP. Methods: Patients with presumed discogenic LBP participated in a prospective, double-blind, randomized, sham controlled trial of a single intradiscal BMC injection compared to a sham procedure. Pain and function were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months by Clinical Outcome Measurement Brief Instrument (COMBI) which includes the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Function was also assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The primary outcome was based upon clinical success, defined by at least 50 % pain relief from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: Sixty-three patients were included in the trial (45 BMC, 18 sham). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome (>50 % relief in NRS) at 3 months (40 % BMC group [95 %CI: 27-50 %] vs 33 % sham group [95 %CI: 15-56 %]), 6 months (40 % BMC [95 %CI: 27-50 %] vs 39 % sham [95 %CI: 20-61 %]), or 12 months (44 % BMC [95 %CI: 31-59 %] vs 56 % sham [95 %CI: 34-75 %]). There were no significant differences in the proportion of patients achieving at least a 30 % improvement on the ODI at 3 months (51 % BMC group [95 %CI: 37-65 %] vs 33 % sham group [95 %CI: 16-56 %]), 6 months (53 % BMC [95 %CI: 39-67 %] vs 44 % sham [95 %CI: 25-65 %]), or 12 months (56 % BMC [95 %CI: 41-69 %] vs 61 % sham [95 %CI: 39-80 %]). Conclusions: Intradiscal BMC was equivalent to a sham procedure for chronic discogenic LBP. Both groups had a high, but statistically equivalent success rate. Unfortunately, the significant limitations of this trial, including lack of quality cell analysis, limit the ability to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of intradiscal BMC.
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.