Fat Tissue and Bone Marrow Injections Both Improve Knee Arthritis

Both Treatments Significantly Reduced Pain for Over a Year

If you're exploring regenerative medicine options for knee osteoarthritis, you may wonder which tissue source works best. Researchers at Emory University compared two approaches: microfragmented adipose tissue (MFAT, or processed fat) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC). The good news? Both treatments provided meaningful, lasting relief.

Patients in both groups experienced significant improvements in pain and daily function. These benefits lasted well beyond one year on average. This matters because many traditional treatments for knee arthritis only help for a short time.

106 Knees Treated Across 76 Patients

The study included 76 patients with a combined 106 knee injections. Some patients received treatment in both knees. The BMAC group had 41 patients (58 knees), while the MFAT group had 35 patients (48 knees).

• Average age: 59 years for BMAC, 63 years for MFAT

• Average follow-up: nearly two years for BMAC, just over one year for MFAT

• All patients had confirmed knee osteoarthritis on imaging

No Meaningful Difference Between Fat and Bone Marrow Sources

When researchers compared the two tissue sources head-to-head, they found no significant difference in outcomes. Both groups showed comparable improvements across all measured areas:

• Overall pain levels

• Quality of life scores

• Knee function during daily activities

• Knee function during sports and recreation

This finding is reassuring. It means patients may have flexibility in choosing their treatment approach. The decision can be based on individual factors rather than one method being clearly superior.

Patients Reported Better Function and Quality of Life

Researchers used several validated questionnaires to track patient progress. The KOOS questionnaire measured knee pain, stiffness, and function. The Emory Quality of Life survey captured overall wellbeing. A visual pain scale let patients rate their discomfort from zero to ten.

All measurements improved significantly after treatment. The improvements weren't minor—they reached statistical significance in every category tested. This comprehensive improvement suggests the treatments help the whole knee, not just one symptom.

Filling a Twenty-Year Treatment Gap

The researchers highlighted an important reality. Millions of Americans fall into a "treatment gap" with knee arthritis. They've tried physical therapy, anti-inflammatory medications, and injections like cortisone or hyaluronic acid. Yet they're not ready for—or can't have—knee replacement surgery.

Traditional conservative treatments often have modest benefits:

• Over-the-counter pain relievers show small effect sizes

• Cortisone provides only short-term relief

• Hyaluronic acid helps but benefits typically fade

On average, patients spend twenty years in this gap. They experience ongoing pain while spending significant money on treatments that don't fully help. Both MFAT and BMAC offer promising options to bridge this gap with longer-lasting improvements.

What This Means for Your Treatment Decision

This study provides encouraging evidence that regenerative medicine can help knee osteoarthritis. Both microfragmented fat tissue and bone marrow concentrate are processed from your own body. This "autologous" approach means no risk of rejection.

The Lipogems® procedure uses the MFAT approach studied here. Fat tissue is harvested through a minimally invasive process and specially prepared to preserve healing cells. These include pericytes (cells that support blood vessel health) and MSCs (mesenchymal stem cells, which promote tissue repair).

If you're considering treatment, discuss both options with your doctor. Factors like your health history, the severity of your arthritis, and personal preference may guide the choice. Either way, this research suggests meaningful improvement is possible.

---

Source: Mautner et al., Stem Cells Translational Medicine, 2019.