General joint information can guide questions but cannot examine you

The strongest recent knee study found no better result from three costly products

A large 2023 study compared three cell products with a steroid shot for sore knees. After twelve months, none was better on the main soreness scores.

The study showed a result for the tested knees and products. The result suggests caution about paying more, but it does not predict your outcome.

Some people improved in every group, including the comparison group. Improvement across all groups doesn't prove which part of the visit caused the change.

A later review found hopeful results in smaller studies, but the range of results was wide. Some findings look useful, while much about individual results remains unknown.

Your own doctor still needs to review medicines, strength, balance, and past injuries. Urgent concerns also belong with a doctor, not with a general guide.

The guide and the promoted clinics share ownership

This publication and the promoted clinics have the same owners. Booking through these pages may help their business.

This is a commercial tie, and it belongs in plain view. The same disclosure appears in the footer throughout the site.

Keep the shared ownership in mind while reading the health information. Ownership doesn't change what an exam can show about your joint.

A doctor may say, ‘The X-ray shows wear, but no test can promise relief from this procedure.’ The doctor's sentence separates what is shown from what remains unknown.

If soreness remains, ask a doctor to examine the area and hear your questions. You deserve clear choices, written costs, and honest limits.

Sources

1. In a 480-patient, four-arm, multicenter randomized phase 2/3 trial, none of three orthobiologic cell injections - autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate, autologous adipose stromal vascular fraction, or allogeneic umbilical cord tissue-derived mesenchymal stromal cells - was superior to any other, or to a corticosteroid injection control, on pain at 12 months.

   Mautner K, et al. — Cell-based versus corticosteroid injections for knee pain in osteoarthritis: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med, 2023. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02632-w.

2. On 27 September 2024 the Ninth Circuit held in United States v. California Stem Cell Treatment Center that stromal vascular fraction produced by enzymatically digesting a patient's own fat IS a drug under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and that the same surgical procedure exception does not apply because the removed fat and the implanted SVF are not the same thing. The district court's ruling for the clinics was reversed.

   United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — United States v. California Stem Cell Treatment Center, Inc., No. 22-56014 (9th Cir. Sept. 27, 2024). , 2024.

3. In orders issued 26 December 2024 and announced 8 January 2025, a federal court permanently banned the co-founders of the Stem Cell Institute of America and their companies from marketing any regenerative medicine treatment, and ordered $5,155,146 in refunds and civil penalties. The court found on summary judgment that they published false and misleading advertisements about the efficacy and approval of stem cell injections for osteoarthritis, neuropathy and joint pain; their clinic charged up to $5,000 per injection and the customers were almost exclusively elderly and disabled people.

   US Federal Trade Commission — Stem Cell Institute Co-Founders and Companies Banned from Marketing Stem Cell Treatments and Ordered to Pay More Than $5.1 Million for Refunds and Civil Penalties. , 2025.