Wenli Dai1, Xi Leng2, Jian Wang3, Zhanjun Shi3, Jin Cheng1, Xiaoqing Hu4, Yingfang Ao5. 1. Institute of Sports Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 2. Medical Imaging Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. 4. Institute of Sports Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: xiaoqinghubj@163.com. 5. Institute of Sports Medicine, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: aoyingfang@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intra-articular mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) injections for knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through April 2020 to identify level I randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the clinical efficacy of MSCs versus control treatments for knee OA. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with random-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in VAS for pain (mean difference [MD] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI -0.60 to 3.85), WOMAC pain score (MD 1.88, 95% CI -0.21 to 3.98), WOMAC function score (MD -0.67, 95% CI -6.54 to 5.19), or WOMAC stiffness score (MD 0.64, 95% CI -0.86 to 2.14) for MSCs. Moreover, the smallest treatment effect of VAS for pain, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC function score, and WOMAC stiffness score did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Additionally, there was no significant difference in percentage of patients crossing the MCID threshold between MSC and placebo groups for VAS for pain (relative risk [RR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.57) or WOMAC total score (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.21). Compared with hyaluronic acid (HA), MSC injection was associated with significantly better improvement in VAS for pain (MD 2.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.07), WOMAC pain score (MD 4.58, 95% CI 0.49 to 8.67), WOMAC total score (MD 14.86, 95% CI 10.59 to 19.13), and WOMAC stiffness score (MD 1.85, 95% CI 0.02 to 3.69). However, the smallest treatment effect of VAS for pain, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC function score, and WOMAC stiffness score did not exceed the MCID. Moreover, there was no significant difference in percentage of patients crossing the MCID threshold between MSC and HA groups for WOMAC total score (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.55). We also found that MSCs did not increase adverse events compared with HA and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-articular MSC injection was not found to be superior to placebo in pain relief and functional improvement for patients with symptomatic knee OA. However, additional direct testing and combination trials of different type of cells, doses, and number of injections of MSCs are required to further enhance clinical decision making for people with symptomatic knee OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I, meta-analysis of level I studies.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intra-articular mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) injections for knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through April 2020 to identify level I randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the clinical efficacy of MSCs versus control treatments for knee OA. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with random-effects models. RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in VAS for pain (mean difference [MD] 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI -0.60 to 3.85), WOMAC pain score (MD 1.88, 95% CI -0.21 to 3.98), WOMAC function score (MD -0.67, 95% CI -6.54 to 5.19), or WOMAC stiffness score (MD 0.64, 95% CI -0.86 to 2.14) for MSCs. Moreover, the smallest treatment effect of VAS for pain, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC function score, and WOMAC stiffness score did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Additionally, there was no significant difference in percentage of patients crossing the MCID threshold between MSC and placebo groups for VAS for pain (relative risk [RR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.57) or WOMAC total score (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.21). Compared with hyaluronic acid (HA), MSC injection was associated with significantly better improvement in VAS for pain (MD 2.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.07), WOMAC pain score (MD 4.58, 95% CI 0.49 to 8.67), WOMAC total score (MD 14.86, 95% CI 10.59 to 19.13), and WOMAC stiffness score (MD 1.85, 95% CI 0.02 to 3.69). However, the smallest treatment effect of VAS for pain, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC function score, and WOMAC stiffness score did not exceed the MCID. Moreover, there was no significant difference in percentage of patients crossing the MCID threshold between MSC and HA groups for WOMAC total score (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.55). We also found that MSCs did not increase adverse events compared with HA and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-articular MSC injection was not found to be superior to placebo in pain relief and functional improvement for patients with symptomatic knee OA. However, additional direct testing and combination trials of different type of cells, doses, and number of injections of MSCs are required to further enhance clinical decision making for people with symptomatic knee OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I, meta-analysis of level I studies.
Authors: Corey W Hunter; Timothy R Deer; Mark R Jones; George C Chang Chien; Ryan S D'Souza; Timothy Davis; Erica R Eldon; Michael F Esposito; Johnathan H Goree; Lissa Hewan-Lowe; Jillian A Maloney; Anthony J Mazzola; John S Michels; Annie Layno-Moses; Shachi Patel; Jeanmarie Tari; Jacqueline S Weisbein; Krista A Goulding; Anikar Chhabra; Jeffrey Hassebrock; Chris Wie; Douglas Beall; Dawood Sayed; Natalie Strand Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2022-09-08 Impact factor: 2.832
Authors: Vilim Molnar; Eduard Pavelić; Kristijan Vrdoljak; Martin Čemerin; Emil Klarić; Vid Matišić; Roko Bjelica; Petar Brlek; Ivana Kovačić; Carlo Tremolada; Dragan Primorac Journal: Genes (Basel) Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 4.141
Authors: Christoph Schmitz; Christopher Alt; David A Pearce; John P Furia; Nicola Maffulli; Eckhard U Alt Journal: Cells Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 6.600