| Title |
Biological Therapies in Regenerative Sports Medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-016-0620-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabel Andia, Nicola Maffulli |
| Abstract |
Regenerative medicine seeks to harness the potential of cell biology for tissue replacement therapies, which will restore lost tissue functionality. Controlling and enhancing tissue healing is not just a matter of cells, but also of molecules and mechanical forces. We first describe the main biological technologies to boost musculoskeletal healing, including bone marrow and subcutaneous fat-derived regenerative products, as well as platelet-rich plasma and conditioned media. We provide some information describing possible mechanisms of action. We performed a literature search up to January 2016 searching for clinical outcomes following the use of cell therapies for sports conditions, tendons, and joints. The safety and efficacy of cell therapies for tendon conditions was examined in nine studies involving undifferentiated and differentiated (skin fibroblasts, tenocytes) cells. A total of 54 studies investigated the effects of mesenchymal stem-cell (MSC) products for joint conditions including anterior cruciate ligament, meniscus, and chondral lesions as well as osteoarthritis. In 22 studies, cellular products were injected intra-articularly, whereas in 32 studies MSC products were implanted during surgical/arthroscopic procedures. The heterogeneity of clinical conditions, cellular products, and approaches for delivery/implantation make comparability difficult. MSC products appear safe in the short- and mid-term, but studies with a long follow-up are scarce. Although the current number of randomized clinical studies is low, stem-cell products may have therapeutic potential. However, these regenerative technologies still need to be optimized. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 7 | 18% |
| United States | 4 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
| Chile | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 61% |
| Scientists | 9 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 122 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 15% |
| Researcher | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 33 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,593,893
of 25,613,746 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,224
of 2,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,836
of 331,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#22
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,613,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.