Infrapatellar Fat Pad:An Alternative Source of Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Introduction. The Infrapatellar fat pad (IPFP) represents an emerging alternative source of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ASCs). We compared the characteristics and differentiation capacity of ASCs isolated from IPFP and SC. Materials and Methods. ASCs were harvested from either IPFP or SC. IPFPs were collected from patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whereas subcutaneous tissues were collected from patients undergoing lipoaspiration. Immunophenotypes of surface antigens were evaluated. Their ability to form colony-forming units (CFUs) and their differentiation potential were determined. The ASCs karyotype was evaluated. Results. There was no difference in the number of CFUs and size of CFUs between IPFP and SC sources. ASCs isolated from both sources had a normal karyotype. The mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) markers on flow cytometry was equivalent. IPFP-ASCs demonstrated significantly higher expression of SOX-9 and RUNX-2 over ASCs isolated from SC (6.19 ± 5.56-, 0.47 ± 0.62-fold; p value = 0.047, and 17.33 ± 10.80-, 1.56 ± 1.31-fold; p value = 0.030, resp.). Discussion and Conclusion. CFU assay of IPFP-ASCs and SC-ASCs harvested by lipoaspiration technique was equivalent. The expression of key chondrogenic and osteogenic genes was increased in cells isolated from IPFP. IPFP should be considered a high quality alternative source of ASCs

Clinical outcomes of double- vs single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of randomized control trials

Clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with double-bundle and single-bundle techniques are still controversial. We therefore performed a systematic review to compare postoperative outcomes between the two techniques. Randomized control trials comparing the outcomes between the two techniques were identified from Medline and EMBASE since inception to April 27, 2011. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. Thirteen of 318 studies were eligible; 9, 11, 7, and 8 studies were pooled for rotation, translation, function, and complication outcomes, respectively. The double-bundle technique was approximately four times (95% CI: 2.65, 11.99) and two times (95% CI: 1.16, 5.21) more likely to show a normal pivot shift and normal International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grading compared with the single-bundle technique. However, there were nonsignificant differences in KT grading (OR = 1.66, 95% CI: 0.77, 3.82), IKDC score (0.29, 95% CI: −1.17, 1.75), Lysholm knee score (−0.87, 95% CI: −2.66, 0.93), Tegner activity score (0.37, 95% CI: −0.05, 0.79), and complications (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.48, 2.57). Heterogeneity was present in some outcomes but there was no evidence of publication bias for any outcome. The double-bundle may be better than the single-bundle ACL reconstruction technique in rotational stability but not for function, translation, and complications