ReviewRegenerative therapy2025
Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes of intra-articular injection of micro-fragmented adipose tissue and stromal vascular fraction cells for knee osteoarthritis treatment: A retrospective single-center cohort study.
Review in Regenerative therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current State of Orthobiologics in Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis-Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Stem Cell Therapy for Inflammatory Diseases: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions.MedComm · 2026Review
- Comparative outcome analyses of stromal vascular fractionWorld journal of experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Adipose Tissue-Derived Therapies for Osteoarthritis: Multifaceted Mechanisms and Clinical Prospects.Cells · 2025Review
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
Background: Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) cells and micro-fragmented adipose tissue (MFAT) have potential for treating knee osteoarthritis (OA), but their efficacy has not been compared. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of SVF and MFAT for knee OA. We hypothesized that SVF provides stronger short-term effects, while MFAT offers more sustained benefits. Methods: A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted on patients with knee OA, with 36 SVF and 36 MFAT cases selected through propensity score matching between September 2017 and February 2022. Patients with KL grades I-IV varus knee OA, significant pain (VAS ≥40), and functional impairment despite conservative treatments were included. Those with knee trauma, severe bony defects, infections, genu valgus, osteonecrosis, rheumatoid arthritis, or severe deformities were excluded. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale, KOOS, knee range of motion, extension/flexion strength, and MRI T2 mapping. Results: SVF and MFAT groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS ( Conclusion: T2 mapping revealed that MFAT had better cartilage preservation than that of SVF cells in less-loaded areas, with a potentially longer-lasting therapeutic effect. These findings offer important insights for clinicians to tailor treatment strategies based on patient needs and disease progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.