Cargando…
Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine
Since the first cell therapeutic study to repair articular cartilage defects in the knee in 1994, several clinical studies have been reported. An overview of the results of clinical studies did not conclusively show improvement over conventional methods, mainly because few studies reach level I of e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3823400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19453519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2009.00789.x |
_version_ | 1782290565461704704 |
---|---|
author | Van Osch, Gerjo J V M Brittberg, Mats Dennis, James E Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, Yvonne M Erben, Reinhold G Konttinen, Yrjö T Luyten, Frank P |
author_facet | Van Osch, Gerjo J V M Brittberg, Mats Dennis, James E Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, Yvonne M Erben, Reinhold G Konttinen, Yrjö T Luyten, Frank P |
author_sort | Van Osch, Gerjo J V M |
collection | PubMed |
description | Since the first cell therapeutic study to repair articular cartilage defects in the knee in 1994, several clinical studies have been reported. An overview of the results of clinical studies did not conclusively show improvement over conventional methods, mainly because few studies reach level I of evidence for effects on middle or long term. However, these explorative trials have provided valuable information about study design, mechanisms of repair and clinical outcome and have revealed that much is still unknown and further improvements are required. Furthermore, cellular and molecular studies using new technologies such as cell tracking, gene arrays and proteomics have provided more insight in the cell biology and mechanisms of joint surface regeneration. Besides articular cartilage, cartilage of other anatomical locations as well as progenitor cells are now considered as alternative cell sources. Growth Factor research has revealed some information on optimal conditions to support cartilage repair. Thus, there is hope for improvement. In order to obtain more robust and reproducible results, more detailed information is needed on many aspects including the fate of the cells, choice of cell type and culture parameters. As for the clinical aspects, it becomes clear that careful selection of patient groups is an important input parameter that should be optimized for each application. In addition, the study outcome parameters should be improved. Although reduced pain and improved function are, from the patient's perspective, the most important outcomes, there is a need for more structure/tissue-related outcome measures. Ideally, criteria and/or markers to identify patients at risk and responders to treatment are the ultimate goal for these more sophisticated regenerative approaches in joint surface repair in particular, and regenerative medicine in general. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3823400 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38234002015-04-27 Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine Van Osch, Gerjo J V M Brittberg, Mats Dennis, James E Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, Yvonne M Erben, Reinhold G Konttinen, Yrjö T Luyten, Frank P J Cell Mol Med Reviews Since the first cell therapeutic study to repair articular cartilage defects in the knee in 1994, several clinical studies have been reported. An overview of the results of clinical studies did not conclusively show improvement over conventional methods, mainly because few studies reach level I of evidence for effects on middle or long term. However, these explorative trials have provided valuable information about study design, mechanisms of repair and clinical outcome and have revealed that much is still unknown and further improvements are required. Furthermore, cellular and molecular studies using new technologies such as cell tracking, gene arrays and proteomics have provided more insight in the cell biology and mechanisms of joint surface regeneration. Besides articular cartilage, cartilage of other anatomical locations as well as progenitor cells are now considered as alternative cell sources. Growth Factor research has revealed some information on optimal conditions to support cartilage repair. Thus, there is hope for improvement. In order to obtain more robust and reproducible results, more detailed information is needed on many aspects including the fate of the cells, choice of cell type and culture parameters. As for the clinical aspects, it becomes clear that careful selection of patient groups is an important input parameter that should be optimized for each application. In addition, the study outcome parameters should be improved. Although reduced pain and improved function are, from the patient's perspective, the most important outcomes, there is a need for more structure/tissue-related outcome measures. Ideally, criteria and/or markers to identify patients at risk and responders to treatment are the ultimate goal for these more sophisticated regenerative approaches in joint surface repair in particular, and regenerative medicine in general. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2009-05 2009-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3823400/ /pubmed/19453519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2009.00789.x Text en © 2009 The Authors Journal compilation © 2009 Foundation for Cellular and Molecular Medicine/Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
spellingShingle | Reviews Van Osch, Gerjo J V M Brittberg, Mats Dennis, James E Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, Yvonne M Erben, Reinhold G Konttinen, Yrjö T Luyten, Frank P Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title | Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title_full | Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title_fullStr | Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title_full_unstemmed | Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title_short | Cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
title_sort | cartilage repair: past and future – lessons for regenerative medicine |
topic | Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3823400/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19453519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2009.00789.x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanoschgerjojvm cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT brittbergmats cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT dennisjamese cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT bastiaansenjenniskensyvonnem cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT erbenreinholdg cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT konttinenyrjot cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine AT luytenfrankp cartilagerepairpastandfuturelessonsforregenerativemedicine |