Login / Signup

Comparison of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate and Allogenic Human Umbilical Cord Blood Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Implantation on Chondral Defect of Knee: Assessment of Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-Up.

Dong-Jin RyuYoon Sang JeonJun Sung ParkGi Cheol BaeJeong-Seok KimMyung Ku Kim
Published in: Cell transplantation (2021)
Biological repair of cartilage lesions remains a significant clinical challenge. A wide variety of methods involving mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been introduced. Because of the limitation of the results, most of the treatment methods have not yet been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and human umbilical cord blood derived mesenchymal stem cells (hUCB-MSCs) implantation were approved by Korea FDA. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes after two different types of MSCs implantation in knee osteoarthritis. Fifty-two patients (52 knees) who underwent cartilage repair surgery using the BMAC (25 knees) and hUCB-MSCs (27 knees) were retrospectively evaluated for 2 years after surgery. Clinical outcomes were evaluated according to the score of visual analogue scale (VAS), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective, and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Cartilage repair was assessed according to the modified Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (M-MOCART) score and the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) cartilage repair scoring system. At 2-year follow-up, clinical outcomes including VAS, IKDC, and KOOS significantly improved (P < 0.05) in both groups; however, there were no differences between two groups. There was no significant difference in M-MOCART [1-year (P = 0.261), 2-year (P = 0.351)] and ICRS repair score (P = 0.655) between two groups. Both groups showed satisfactory clinical and MRI outcomes. Implantation of MSCs from BMAC or hUCB-MSCs is safe and effective for repairing cartilage lesion. However, large cases and a well-controlled prospective design with long-term follow-up studies are needed.
Keyphrases