You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Intra-articular injection of two different doses of autologous bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: long-term follow up of a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial (phase I/II)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-018-1591-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José María Lamo-Espinosa, Gonzalo Mora, Juan F. Blanco, Froilán Granero-Moltó, Jorge María Núñez-Córdoba, Silvia López-Elío, Enrique Andreu, Fermín Sánchez-Guijo, José Dámaso Aquerreta, José María Bondía, Andrés Valentí-Azcárate, María del Consuelo del Cañizo, Eva María Villarón, Juan Ramón Valentí-Nin, Felipe Prósper |
| Abstract |
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are a promising option to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA). Their safety and usefulness have been reported in several short-term clinical trials but less information is available on the long-term effects of MSC in patients with osteoarthritis. We have evaluated patients included in our previous randomized clinical trial (CMM-ART, NCT02123368) to determine their long-term clinical effect. A phase I/II multicenter randomized clinical trial with active control was conducted between 2012 and 2014. Thirty patients diagnosed with knee OA were randomly assigned to Control group, intraarticularly administered hyaluronic acid alone, or to two treatment groups, hyaluronic acid together with 10 × 106 or 100 × 106 cultured autologous bone marrow-derived MSCs (BM-MSCs), and followed up for 12 months. After a follow up of 4 years adverse effects and clinical evolution, assessed using VAS and WOMAC scorings are reported. No adverse effects were reported after BM-MSCs administration or during the follow-up. BM-MSCs-administered patients improved according to VAS, median value (IQR) for Control, Low-dose and High-dose groups changed from 5 (3, 7), 7 (5, 8) and 6 (4, 8) to 7 (6, 7), 2 (2, 5) and 3 (3, 4), respectively at the end of follow up (Low-dose vs Control group, p = 0.01; High-dose vs Control group, p = 0.004). Patients receiving BM-MSCs also improved clinically according to WOMAC. Control group showed an increase median value of 4 points (- 11;10) while Low-dose and High-dose groups exhibited values of - 18 (- 28;- 9) and - 10 (- 21;- 3) points, respectively (Low-dose vs Control group p = 0.043). No clinical differences between the BM-MSCs receiving groups were found. Single intraarticular injection of in vitro expanded autologous BM-MSCs is a safe and feasible procedure that results in long-term clinical and functional improvement of knee OA. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 221 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 32 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 82 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 54 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 5% |
| Engineering | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 12% |
| Unknown | 87 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 November 2018.
All research outputs
#15,844,245
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,151
of 4,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,869
of 333,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#32
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 333,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.