Similar short-term results between scaffold implanted mesenchymal stem cells vs acellular scaffolds with concentrated bone marrow aspirate augmentation for the repair of chondral defects of the knee: evidence from a meta-analysis

Zachariah Gene Wing Ow , Katelyn Kaye-Ling Lim , Shant Qinxiang Sin , Hannah Li Xin Cheang , Dean Wang , Denny Tjiauw Tjoen Lie , James Hoi Po Hui , Keng Lin Wong
{"title":"Similar short-term results between scaffold implanted mesenchymal stem cells vs acellular scaffolds with concentrated bone marrow aspirate augmentation for the repair of chondral defects of the knee: evidence from a meta-analysis","authors":"Zachariah Gene Wing Ow ,&nbsp;Katelyn Kaye-Ling Lim ,&nbsp;Shant Qinxiang Sin ,&nbsp;Hannah Li Xin Cheang ,&nbsp;Dean Wang ,&nbsp;Denny Tjiauw Tjoen Lie ,&nbsp;James Hoi Po Hui ,&nbsp;Keng Lin Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.jcjp.2023.100128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Scaffold-implanted mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are gaining popularity for the treatment of cartilage defects. However, there is little evidence comparing its efficacy against the currently well-established technique of utilizing acellular scaffolds (ACs) with concentrated bone marrow aspirate (cBMA) for treating knee chondral defects.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To compare scaffold-implanted MSCs against ACs with cBMA for the repair of knee cartilage lesions.</p></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><p>Medline and Embase.</p></div><div><h3>Study Eligibility Criteria, Participants, and Interventions</h3><p>Inclusion: (1) Studies involving patients with high grade chondral lesions on the tibiofemoral or patellofemoral articular surfaces, (2) studies involving patients that received either scaffold-implanted MSCs or ACs for treatment, and (3) studies with postoperative patient follow-up of at least 1 year.</p></div><div><h3>Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods</h3><p>Single-arm meta-analysis of studies reporting patient-reported outcome measures, reoperation and incomplete filling rates was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Degree of postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee score improvement in patients receiving ACs augmented with cBMA was significantly higher compared to those receiving scaffold-implanted MSCs (<em>P &lt;</em> .01). Additionally, patients receiving ACs with cBMA augmentation were at significantly lower risk of incomplete defect filling when compared to patients receiving either scaffold-implanted MSCs (<em>P</em> &lt; .01), or patients receiving non-cBMA augmented ACs (<em>P</em> &lt; .01).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This meta-analysis demonstrates that cartilage repair with ACs with cBMA augmentation yields marginally better short-term outcomes when compared to scaffold-implanted MSCs. This suggests that even with the advent of MSCs increasing in availability as a treatment modality, ACs with cBMA augmentation remains as a competitive, cost-effective option for cartilage repair.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100760,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation","volume":"3 4","pages":"Article 100128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667254523000331/pdfft?md5=438d29489865046824105eaf2b2f611e&pid=1-s2.0-S2667254523000331-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667254523000331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Scaffold-implanted mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are gaining popularity for the treatment of cartilage defects. However, there is little evidence comparing its efficacy against the currently well-established technique of utilizing acellular scaffolds (ACs) with concentrated bone marrow aspirate (cBMA) for treating knee chondral defects.

Objectives

To compare scaffold-implanted MSCs against ACs with cBMA for the repair of knee cartilage lesions.

Data Sources

Medline and Embase.

Study Eligibility Criteria, Participants, and Interventions

Inclusion: (1) Studies involving patients with high grade chondral lesions on the tibiofemoral or patellofemoral articular surfaces, (2) studies involving patients that received either scaffold-implanted MSCs or ACs for treatment, and (3) studies with postoperative patient follow-up of at least 1 year.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods

Single-arm meta-analysis of studies reporting patient-reported outcome measures, reoperation and incomplete filling rates was performed.

Results

Degree of postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee score improvement in patients receiving ACs augmented with cBMA was significantly higher compared to those receiving scaffold-implanted MSCs (P < .01). Additionally, patients receiving ACs with cBMA augmentation were at significantly lower risk of incomplete defect filling when compared to patients receiving either scaffold-implanted MSCs (P < .01), or patients receiving non-cBMA augmented ACs (P < .01).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrates that cartilage repair with ACs with cBMA augmentation yields marginally better short-term outcomes when compared to scaffold-implanted MSCs. This suggests that even with the advent of MSCs increasing in availability as a treatment modality, ACs with cBMA augmentation remains as a competitive, cost-effective option for cartilage repair.

在修复膝关节软骨缺损方面,植入间充质干细胞的支架与骨髓抽吸物浓缩增量的无细胞支架的短期效果相似:一项荟萃分析的证据
背景植入支架的间充质干细胞(MSCs)在治疗软骨缺损方面越来越受欢迎。目的比较支架植入间充质干细胞与浓缩骨髓抽吸物(cBMA)的细胞支架在修复膝关节软骨损伤方面的疗效。研究资格标准、参与者和干预措施纳入:(1)涉及胫骨股骨或髌骨关节面高度软骨损伤患者的研究;(2)涉及接受支架植入间充质干细胞或ACs治疗患者的研究;(3)术后患者随访至少1年的研究。研究评估与综述方法对报告患者报告结果指标、再手术率和不完全填充率的研究进行单臂荟萃分析。结果与接受支架植入间充质干细胞的患者相比,接受 cBMA 增强 ACs 的患者术后国际膝关节文献委员会评分改善程度明显更高(P <.01)。此外,与接受支架植入间充质干细胞(P <.01)或接受非 cBMA 增强 ACs(P <.01)的患者相比,接受 cBMA 增强 ACs 的患者发生缺损不完全填充的风险明显较低。结论这项荟萃分析表明,与支架植入间充质干细胞相比,使用 cBMA 增强 ACs 进行软骨修复的短期疗效略好。这表明,即使间充质干细胞作为一种治疗方式的可用性越来越高,但使用 cBMA 增强 ACs 进行软骨修复仍是一种具有竞争力和成本效益的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信