↓ Skip to main content

Stem cells in articular cartilage regeneration

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 1,052)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 tweeters
video
2 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 Mendeley
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.
Title
Stem cells in articular cartilage regeneration
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13018-016-0378-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giuseppe Filardo, Francesco Perdisa, Alice Roffi, Maurilio Marcacci, Elizaveta Kon

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have emerged as a promising option to treat articular defects and early osteoarthritis (OA) stages. However, both their potential and limitations for a clinical use remain controversial. Thus, the aim of this systematic review was to examine MSCs treatment strategies in clinical settings, in order to summarize the current evidence of their efficacy for the treatment of cartilage lesions and OA.Among the 60 selected studies, 7 were randomized, 13 comparative, 31 case series, and 9 case reports; 26 studies reported the results after injective administration, whereas 33 used surgical implantation. One study compared the two different modalities. With regard to the cell source, 20 studies concerned BMSCs, 17 ADSCs, 16 BMC, 5 PBSCs, 1 SDSCs, and 1 compared BMC versus PBSCs. Overall, despite the increasing literature on this topic, the evidence is still limited, in particular for high-level studies. On the other hand, the available studies allow to draw some indications. First, no major adverse events related to the treatment or to the cell harvest have been reported. Second, a clinical benefit of using MSCs therapies has been reported in most of the studies, regardless of cell source, indication, or administration method. This effectiveness has been reflected by clinical improvements and also positive MRI and macroscopic findings, whereas histologic features gave more controversial results among different studies. Third, young age, lower BMI, smaller lesion size for focal lesions, and earlier stages of OA joints have been shown to correlate with better outcomes, even though the available data strength does not allow to define clear cutoff values. Finally, definite trends can be observed with regard to the delivery method: currently cultured cells are mostly being administered by i.a. injection, while one-step surgical implantation is preferred for cell concentrates. In conclusion, while promising results have been shown, the potential of these treatments should be confirmed by reliable clinical data through double-blind, controlled, prospective and multicenter studies with longer follow-up, and specific studies should be designed to identify the best cell sources, manipulation, and delivery techniques, as well as pathology and disease phase indications.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 159 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 20%
Student > Master 25 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 14%
Other 15 9%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 24 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 10%
Engineering 16 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 7%
Materials Science 4 2%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 32 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 17 December 2018.
All research outputs
#1,594,125
of 17,359,532 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#27
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,185
of 270,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,359,532 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,052 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 270,930 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them