Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis and a major cause of chronic pain and stiffness. It develops when healthy cartilage and its supporting extracellular matrix break down faster than the body can repair them. Over time, the specialized cartilage cells known as chondrocytes become less effective—whether due to aging, prior injury, or sustained mechanical stress—while the collagen framework gradually loses strength and elasticity. As cartilage loss progresses, the joint becomes mechanically irritated, synovial fluid signaling changes, inflammation may increase, and everyday movement can become painful.

Most conventional osteoarthritis treatment options focus on managing symptoms rather than addressing these underlying biological changes. Exercise therapy, weight management, pain medication, and injections such as corticosteroids or hyaluronic acid can provide relief, but they typically do not rebuild cartilage or restore the joint’s collagen structure. When function declines beyond a certain point, orthopaedic surgery, including joint replacement, becomes the standard treatment pathway. For patients who wish to delay surgery—or for whom surgery is not an ideal option—regenerative medicine enters the discussion, including approaches such as PRP, Bone Marrow Concentrate (BMC), and MSEC. Stem cell treatments for osteoarthritis are often portrayed online as either miracle cures or as unproven hype. In reality, they fall somewhere in between. This article outlines the regenerative treatment options currently available, explains how they differ biologically, summarizes what scientific evidence supports today, and clarifies who may realistically benefit.

In everyday marketing, “stem cell treatment” can refer to several different interventions. Clinically, most regenerative approaches rely on adult stem cells and related cell populations, particularly mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) or MSC-rich mixtures. Embryonic stem cells are not used in routine care for OA because of ethical and regulatory constraints and because real-world protocols focus on safer, clinically established sources.

Modern stem cell biology also shapes expectations. In osteoarthritis, the goal is rarely that injected cells permanently turn into new cartilage. Instead, the therapeutic aim is biological signalling: cells and platelets release factors that can reduce inflammatory pathways, influence synovial fluid chemistry, support chondrocytes, and shift the joint environment toward repair. This microenvironment effect is a central role in osteoarthritis for regenerative therapies and helps explain why symptom improvement can occur even without obvious cartilage regrowth on imaging.

Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) for Osteoarthritis:

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is produced from a patient’s blood and concentrates platelets and growth
factors. PRP is not a stem cell injection, but it can act as a regenerative therapy by modulating
inflammation and supporting signalling after injury. For early osteoarthritis and for patients whose primary
goal is symptom relief, PRP may reduce joint pain and stiffness for a period of time.
PRP also has clear limitations. It does not supply adult stem cells, and it does not reliably drive tissue
regeneration of cartilage in moderate or advanced OA. Results vary because PRP preparation methods

differ across clinics, and the impact tends to be smaller when cartilage loss is more advanced or
alignment issues dominate symptoms. This is one reason many centers prefer more biologically complex
options.

Bone Marrow Concentrate (BMC) for Osteoarthritis:

Bone Marrow Concentrate (BMC) is obtained from bone marrow (commonly the iliac crest) and processed
to concentrate a broader set of regenerative components. BMC can contain adult stem cells (including
MSCs), progenitor cells, immune-modulating cells, and signalling molecules. This wider cellular
ecosystem is a key difference versus PRP.[1]
In stem cells osteoarthritis treatment, BMC is used to influence the joint environment rather than promise
instant cartilage replacement. Clinically, the goals include reducing inflammatory signaling, supporting
chondrocytes, and improving extracellular matrix turnover so the joint can function with less irritation.
Many patients report improved pain and stiffness and better function, particularly in mild to moderate
disease, when combined with structured rehabilitation and sensible load management.
At ANOVA IRM, BMC is the primary osteoarthritis regenerative option because it typically offers more
biological depth than PRP while remaining an autologous therapy. That matters for safety and
consistency: careful patient evaluation, sterile processing, and an individualized rehab plan are essential
to protect remaining cartilage and improve outcomes.

MSCs: Advanced Stem Cell Therapy as a Complement to BMC

MSEC (as used here) refers to mesenchymal stem cell–derived therapies, including standardized MSC preparations or MSC-derived secretome approaches, depending on the regulatory framework. These options are more complex and therefore more expensive. They are not always necessary, depending on the exact desired outcome, but they can complement BMC when a stronger biological signal is desired.

In selected cases—such as professional athletes, patients with very high performance demands, or situations where earlier approaches did not produce sufficient results—a treatment combining BMC with MSEC may be considered. The logic is additive: BMC provides an autologous regenerative mixture tailored to the patient, while MSEC can amplify immunomodulatory signaling that may improve the joint microenvironment.

PRP vs BMC vs MSEC for Osteoarthritis

PRP is growth-factor focused and can help symptoms in early OA, but it contains no stem cells and has limited structural impact. BMC provides a broader regenerative mixture with adult stem cells and immune modulation, and it is often the core stem cell therapy approach for osteoarthritis when a stronger joint-biologic strategy is needed. MSEC is advanced MSC-based signalling used selectively and sometimes combined with BMC for high-demand cases where the goal is maximal biological support.

Evidence comes from clinical trials, as well as preclinical work including studies in mice that clarify mechanisms.[5] In people, outcomes depend on disease stage, alignment, activity, and rehabilitation. Many systematic review publications conclude that stem cell injections may improve pain and function for months compared with baseline or some controls, but results vary widely and study protocols are heterogeneous. That variability is why clinics should be transparent about limitations, dosing, and follow-up. Clinics should track outcomes over time and document imaging, function scores, and return-to-sport decisions whenever possible for patients.

In practical terms, the most consistent results tend to occur in earlier disease, where there is still some cartilage to protect.[2] In later stages, the mechanical component dominates, and regenerative signalling alone may not overcome severe structural damage and the need for a joint replacement surgery.[3][4]

Any injection-based approach carries potential risks such as temporary flare, bleeding, infection, or worsening symptoms if activity is not managed. Benefits can include improved pain and stiffness, better function, and the potential to delay orthopaedic surgery in selected patients. The biggest limitation is disease stage: when cartilage is severely depleted and the joint is mechanically unstable, regenerative therapies are less likely to provide meaningful or lasting benefit.

Patients with mild to moderate OA, remaining cartilage, and manageable alignment often see the best impact. Those with a history of injury—such as meniscus damage, a tendon overload pattern, or a prior tear—may also improve when inflammation is reduced and biomechanics are corrected. Rehabilitation, strength, mobility, and gradual return to activity are part of maximizing results.

At ANOVA, our osteoarthritis treatment approach focuses on supporting the affected joint biologically and functionally for as long as possible, with the goal of delaying or reducing the need for joint replacement. We are fully aware that current stem cell–based treatments do not represent a permanent cure and that their effects are typically temporary. However, even temporary improvement can be clinically meaningful.

By reducing pain, improving joint function, and stabilizing the joint environment, regenerative treatments may help patients maintain mobility and quality of life while preserving time. That time can be valuable—not only for the patient’s daily functioning, but also because osteoarthritis treatment options continue to evolve, including advances in surgical techniques and regenerative strategies.