ArticleCartilage2026
Subchondral Knee Injections: A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Current Clinical Outcomes, Safety, and Arthroplasty Delay.
Article in Cartilage, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
IntroductionOsteoarthritis is considered a whole-joint disease involving subchondral bone. Intraosseous therapies such as calcium phosphate (CaP), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) offer joint-preserving options for knee osteoarthritis (OA).PurposeTo critically appraise and update the clinical evidence on intraosseous injections for knee osteoarthritis, focusing on safety, functional outcomes, need for retreatment, and conversion rates to total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsA systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registration (CRD420251104989). Clinical studies reporting outcomes of intraosseous injections with CaP, PRP, or MSCs for knee osteoarthritis with ≥5 patients and ≥6 months of follow-up were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the modified Coleman Methodology Score and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool.ResultsTwenty-four studies involving 1,109 patients (mean age, 55 years; mean follow-up, 38 months) met inclusion criteria: 10 on CaP, 6 on PRP, and 8 on MSCs. Five were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Most studies reported significant improvements in pain and function. CaP injection outcomes were variable, with TKA conversion rates ranging from 1.3% to 45%. PRP and MSCs studies showed favorable safety profiles and lower conversion rates. Long-term MSCs data indicated sustained relief and delayed TKA over up to 15 years. However, overall study quality was modest, with only one RCT rated as low risk of bias.ConclusionIntraosseous injections may improve symptoms and delay arthroplasty in selected patients with knee OA, with MSCs showing the most favorable long-term results. PRP appears to be a safe option whereas CaP outcomes are more variable. Standardized protocols and high-quality RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to optimize patient selection and treatment efficacy.
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.