Palombella Silvia, Lopa Silvia, Gianola Silvia, Zagra Luigi, Moretti Matteo, Lovati Arianna B
Cell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.
Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan 20161, Italy.
Stem Cells Int. 2019 Dec 27;2019:3715964. doi: 10.1155/2019/3715964. eCollection 2019.
Nonunions represent one of the major indications for clinical settings with stem cell-based therapies. The objective of this research was to systematically assess the current evidence for the efficacy of bone marrow-derived cell-based approaches associated or not with bone scaffolds for the treatment of nonunions. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed) and CENTRAL up to July 2019 for clinical studies focused on the use of cell-based therapies and bone marrow derivatives to treat bone nonunions. Three investigators independently extracted the data and appraised the risk of bias. We analysed 27 studies including a total number of 347 participants exposed to four interventions: bone marrow concentrate (BMAC), BMAC combined with scaffold (BMAC/Scaffold), bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (BMSCs), and BMSC combined with scaffold (BMSC/Scaffold). Two controlled studies showed a positive trend in bone healing in favour of BMAC/Scaffold or BMSC/Scaffold treatment against bone autograft, although the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.11, 95% CI -0.05; 0.28). Among single cohort studies, the highest mean pooled proportion of healing rate was reported for BMAC (77%; 95% CI 63%-89%; 107 cases, = 8) and BMAC/Scaffold treatments with (71%; 95% CI 50%-89%; 117 cases, = 8) at 6 months of follow-up. At 12 months of follow-up, an increasing proportion of bone healing was observed in all the treatment groups, ranging from 81% to 100%. These results indicate that BMAC or BMAC/Scaffold might be considered as the primary choice to treat nonunions with a successful healing rate at a midterm follow-up. Moreover, this meta-analysis highlighted that the presence of a scaffold positively influences the healing rate at a long-term follow-up. More case-control studies are still needed to support the clinical improvement of cell-based therapies against autografts, up to now considered as the gold standard for the treatment of nonunions.
骨不连是基于干细胞疗法临床应用的主要适应症之一。本研究的目的是系统评估目前关于骨髓来源细胞联合或不联合骨支架治疗骨不连疗效的证据。我们检索了截至2019年7月的MEDLINE(PubMed)和CENTRAL数据库,以查找专注于使用基于细胞的疗法和骨髓衍生物治疗骨不连的临床研究。三位研究人员独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。我们分析了27项研究,共347名参与者接受了四种干预措施:骨髓浓缩物(BMAC)、BMAC联合支架(BMAC/支架)、骨髓间充质干细胞(BMSC)以及BMSC联合支架(BMSC/支架)。两项对照研究显示,与自体骨移植相比,BMAC/支架或BMSC/支架治疗在促进骨愈合方面呈积极趋势,尽管差异无统计学意义(风险比0.11,95%置信区间-0.05;0.28)。在单队列研究中,随访6个月时,BMAC(77%;95%置信区间63%-89%;107例, = 8)和BMAC/支架治疗(71%;95%置信区间50%-89%;117例, = 8)的愈合率平均合并比例最高。随访12个月时,所有治疗组的骨愈合比例均有所增加,范围为81%至100%。这些结果表明,在中期随访中,BMAC或BMAC/支架可能被视为治疗骨不连的首选,愈合率较高。此外,该荟萃分析强调,在长期随访中,支架的存在对愈合率有积极影响。仍需要更多的病例对照研究来支持基于细胞的疗法相对于自体骨移植在临床疗效上的改善,目前自体骨移植被视为治疗骨不连的金标准。