Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39849578›Full record

SynthesisStem cell research & therapy2025

Mesenchymal stromal cells-derived extracellular vesicles in cartilage regeneration: potential and limitations.

María Piñeiro-Ramil, Iván Gómez-Seoane, Ana Isabel Rodríguez-Cendal, Isaac Fuentes-Boquete, Silvia Díaz-Prado

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Stem cell research & therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Short histological kaleidoscope - recent findings in histology. Part V. About tendons, ligaments, and cartilages.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

María Piñeiro-RamilGrupo de Investigación en Terapia Celular y Medicina Regenerativa, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de A Coruña (INIBIC), Fundación Pública Gallega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña (CHUAC), Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), A Coruña, 15006, Spain.
Iván Gómez-SeoaneGrupo de Investigación en Terapia Celular y Medicina Regenerativa, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de A Coruña (INIBIC), Fundación Pública Gallega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña (CHUAC), Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), A Coruña, 15006, Spain.
Ana Isabel Rodríguez-CendalGrupo de Investigación en Terapia Celular y Medicina Regenerativa, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de A Coruña (INIBIC), Fundación Pública Gallega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña (CHUAC), Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), A Coruña, 15006, Spain.
Isaac Fuentes-BoqueteGrupo de Investigación en Terapia Celular y Medicina Regenerativa, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de A Coruña (INIBIC), Fundación Pública Gallega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña (CHUAC), Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), A Coruña, 15006, Spain.
Silvia Díaz-PradoGrupo de Investigación en Terapia Celular y Medicina Regenerativa, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de A Coruña (INIBIC), Fundación Pública Gallega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de A Coruña (CHUAC), Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), A Coruña, 15006, Spain. s.diaz1@udc.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9776-2180

Funding

Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria, Xunta de Galicia ED431B 2020/55Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria, Xunta de Galicia ED431B 2023/58Fundación Pública Galega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC Proyectos de Desarrollo y Transferencia 2022Fundación Pública Galega de Investigación Biomédica INIBIC Proyectos de Desarrollo y Transferencia 2024Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI17/02197Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI20/00933Ministerio de Universidades RSU.UDC.MS06
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArticular cartilage injuries can lead to pain, stiffness, and reduced mobility, and may eventually progress to osteoarthritis (OA). Despite substantial research efforts, effective therapies capable of regenerating cartilage are still lacking. Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are known for their differentiation and immunomodulatory capabilities, yet challenges such as limited survival post-injection and inconsistent therapeutic outcomes hinder their clinical application. Recent evidence suggests that the beneficial effects of MSCs are largely mediated by their secreted small extracellular vesicles (sEVs), which have been shown to promote tissue repair and reduce inflammation. MSC-derived sEVs have shown promise in mitigating cartilage degradation and chondrocyte apoptosis, positioning them as a promising alternative to MSC-based therapies for OA treatment. This review explores the potential and limitations of MSC-derived sEVs in cartilage regeneration. MAIN TEXT: This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, with a comprehensive search of the Web of Science and Scopus databases for studies published between 2019 and 2024. A total of 223 records were identified, of which 132 articles were assessed for eligibility based on general selection criteria. After full-text screening, 60 articles were initially selected, comprising 58 in vitro studies and 40 in vivo studies. Following further exclusion based on specific criteria, 33 in vitro and 28 in vivo studies from a total of 47 scientific papers were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Most studies indicate that MSC-derived sEVs enhance chondrocyte proliferation, improve cartilage extracellular matrix composition, and reduce matrix-degrading enzymes and inflammation, thereby delaying OA progression.

conclusionA growing body of evidence supports the use of MSC-derived sEVs as a therapeutic tool for preventing OA progression, with most studies reporting beneficial effects on cartilage structure and function. However, challenges remain in optimizing and standardizing sEVs isolation, dosage, and delivery methods for clinical application. Further research is necessary to elucidate the mechanisms underlying sEVs-mediated cartilage regeneration and to facilitate their translation into effective OA therapies.

Indexed as

Cartilage, ArticularExtracellular VesiclesMesenchymal Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationOsteoarthritisRegenerationAnimalsChondrocytesHumansCell-free therapyChondrocytesExosomesOA

Identifiers

PMID39849578
PMCPMC11755911

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.