Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 538

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Autologous Bone Marrow–Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation: An Observational Cohort Study

Nejadnik, Hossein, Hui, James H., Feng Choong, Erica Pei, Tai, Bee-Choo, Lee, Eng Hin·2010·The American Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background: First-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation has limitations, and introducing new effective cell sources can improve cartilage repair. Purpose: This study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with first-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation to patients treated with autologous bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Seventy-two matched (lesion site and age) patients underwent cartilage repair using chondrocytes (n = 36) or BMSCs (n = 36). Clinical outcomes were measured before operation and 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after operation using the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) Cartilage Injury Evaluation Package, which included questions from the Short-Form Health Survey, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form, Lysholm knee scale, and Tegner activity level scale. Results: There was significant improvement in the patients’ quality of life (physical and mental components of the Short Form-36 questionnaire included in the ICRS package) after cartilage repair in both groups (autologous chondrocyte implantation and BMSCs). However, there was no difference between the BMSC and the autologous chondrocyte implantation group in terms of clinical outcomes except for Physical Role Functioning, with a greater improvement over time in the BMSC group ( P = .044 for interaction effect). The IKDC subjective knee evaluation ( P = .861), Lysholm ( P = .627), and Tegner ( P = .200) scores did not show any significant difference between groups over time. However, in general, men showed significantly better improvements than women. Patients younger than 45 years of age scored significantly better than patients older than 45 years in the autologous chondrocyte implantation group, but age did not make a difference in outcomes in the BMSC group. Conclusion: Using BMSCs in cartilage repair is as effective as chondrocytes for articular cartilage repair. In addition, it required 1 less knee surgery, reduced costs, and minimized donor-site morbidity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0363546509359067

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 538

Metadata

Authors
Nejadnik, H., Hui, J. H., Feng Choong, E. P., Tai, B.-C., & Lee, E. H.
Venue
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Published
2010-04-14
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
1110-1116
ISSN
  • 0363-5465 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3365
OpenAlex
W2108725095
Cited by
538
References
30
FWCI
21.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Autologous Bone Marrow–Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation: An Observational Cohort Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0363546509359067
The paper
Nejadnik, H., Hui, J. H., Feng Choong, E. P., Tai, B.-C., & Lee, E. H. (2010). Autologous Bone Marrow–Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation: An Observational Cohort Study. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546509359067

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.