There is an alarming difference between the novice one-size-fits-all stem cell treatment and the decades of experience and knowledge performed and owned by Regenexx. It is critical to be a knowledgeable consumer and business owner to not only avoid subpar treatment and care, but to also understand the level of expertise in the growing field of orthopedic stem cell treatments.
Case in point is the first Mayo Clinic stem cell efficacy study. Mayo is regarded as a world renowned leader in the medical field but proved to be substandard in understanding and administering basic and critical components of a stem cell procedure study to measure efficacy. Their findings were inconsistent and much has to do with their lack of knowledge and expertise in our field of expertise. Read Regenexx’s detailed response to the Mayo Clinic Study here:
To access the Mayo Clinic study click here.
- The below highlights a few of the obvious problems with this study that show even a clinic like Mayo is nowhere near the level of sophistication and expertise that stands behind every Regenexx procedure. While the authors claim that they used BMAC (same as BMC), what they actually used was a different animal, BMC plus large volumes of PPP (platelet poor plasma).
- The total cell count of the concentrated bone marrow was very low, and the authors diluted this still further. Multiple studies show that the concentration of stem cells in the knee or on a cartilage lesion is likely related directly to the outcome, so by diluting the number of cells, the authors may have reduced the efficacy of an otherwise helpful procedure.
- The concentration of cells injected was very low. This paper used significantly less than the 400 M TNC per knee that we define as the lower limit for a positive pain outcome in our paper. (see full report)
- The bone marrow aspirate technique was not the best for maximizing yield. We know based on multiple papers that lower volumes from multiple cortex sites produces more cells―see the video on how to maximize stem cell yield from a bone marrow aspirate. Click here:
5. They used the wrong anticoagulant for bone marrow. In our experience, the ACD they used is a poor anticoagulant for bone marrow as it often produces clots. Since they used a machine to process the bone marrow, they would have no idea if they had clots in the marrow. However, clots rob cells, so this may be one of many reasons the number of re-injected cells was low.
6. The choice of treating bilateral-knee-arthritis patients was not ideal, as our registry research has shown that patients who have three or more joints involved don’t fare as well with these procedures, likely due to a systemic stem cell problem. While they don’t report any info on other joints, it’s likely a safe bet that a significant portion of patients with bilateral knee arthritis have arthritis in other joints as well.
7. Regenexx procedures are the world’s most advanced stem cell and blood platelet procedures for treating orthopedic injuries, arthritis and other degenerative conditions.
I look forward to showing you how our expertise helps companies just like yours save money while contributing to employee wellbeing and orthopedic health. Adding our procedures to your health and worker’s compensation programs is at no cost to you.