I recently received the yearly publication from the Orthopedic and Rheumatology Institute of the Cleveland Clinic; the latter recognized as one of the 10 most prestigious orthopedic centers in the nation. Every year the publication, a marketing exercise by the Cleveland Clinic, focuses on certain subspecialty areas within the discipline of the care and treatment of the musculoskeletal system. The obvious purpose of such a yearly event is to recruit referrals from practicing orthopedic surgeons and rheumatologists as well as the medical community in general.

This year the focus was on Adult Total Hip Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis and Adult Unilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis. I will summarize the results; let’s start with the hip:

“Hip-Related Pain 1 Year After Surgery: “on average, 92% of patients reported clinically important improvement in hip-related pain after 1 year, while 1% reported worsening (7% showed no detectable change in hip-related pain).”

“On average, 90% of patients reported a clinically important improvement in hip-related function after 1 year, while 1% reported worsening (9% showed no detectable change in hip-related function).”

The knee doesn’t fare as well:

“On average, 85% of patients reported a clinically important improvement in knee-related pain after 1 year, while 2% reported worsening (13% showed no detectable change in knee-related pain).”

“On average, 82% of patients reported a clinically important improvement in knee-related function after 1 year, while 2% reported worsening (16% showed no detectable change in knee-related function).”

The data was derived from patient self-reported scores collected during office visits up to 6 months before and 1 year after surgeries performed.

In my practice, every patient who undergoes a Bone Marrow Concentrate intervention is entered into an outcomes data base with both subjective and objective data points measured. It is quite comprehensive and numbers over 500 patients extending over a span now of 4 and ½ years. While the Cleveland Clinic report is based on subjective parameters and ours on both subjective and objective scores, I am able to extract subjective measures alone. I am pleased to report that in the case of the hip and the knee, our outcomes with a needle are equal to or better than those of the major surgery with a scalpel. Then factor in the prompt rehabilitation of a stem cell procedure compared with the prolonged rehabilitation inherent in a joint replacement. Lastly, consider the relative absence of complications of a stem cell intervention compared to the morbidity and mortality of a joint replacement.

Perhaps of greater significance to the stated advantage of a Bone Marrow Concentrate procedure for Osteoarthritis is the fact that no bridges are burned. If the patient is not satisfied at one year or five, a stem cell procedure may be repeated with a needle. If the arthritis progresses to an advanced stage, the fall back option is a joint replacement. The only choice following an unsatisfactory joint replacement is to accept the surgically induced impairment or undergo a risky revision surgery with a high likelihood of a complication or less than satisfactory outcome. Call 312 475 1893 to schedule an appointment today.

For more information watch my Regenerative Medicine Webinar Video

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Free Educational Seminars

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This