Check what treatment studies found for soreness

Look for changes that help at home

Some studies found less soreness after blood-based joint care. Other studies found little or no difference in knee soreness or walking.

That mixed finding means no one can promise your result. Ask how many people in those studies felt enough relief to walk or sleep better.

Also ask when they noticed relief and how long it lasted. You'll then have something useful to weigh against cost and effort.

Separate less soreness from joint repair

An X-ray may look unchanged even when walking feels easier. It shows the bones, while your daily task shows what you can do.

The opposite can happen when an X-ray changes but soreness doesn't. Less soreness and a changed X-ray are two separate findings.

Blood-based care may be offered to ease symptoms. It isn't proof that worn cartilage, the smooth covering on bone ends, has returned.

Decide what would make treatment worthwhile

Name the daily task that may become easier if care helps. Agree on a date when you'll try that same task again.

Compare the possible relief with price, risk, and missed activity. If those details aren't clear, keep asking before you pay.

Most people ask whether the treatment works. Relief varies, so compare your walking distance or reach during a normal week before and after care.

Sources

1. The RESTORE trial - a participant-, injector- and assessor-blinded RCT of 288 adults aged 50+ with symptomatic medial knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence 2-3) - compared three weekly intra-articular PRP injections against saline placebo, with co-primary endpoints of 12-month knee pain and medial tibial cartilage volume on MRI. PRP did not beat placebo on either. It is the single best-designed test of the specific claim that PRP changes joint structure, and it was negative.

   Bennell KL, et al. — Effect of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma vs Placebo Injection on Pain and Medial Tibial Cartilage Volume in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: The RESTORE Randomized Clinical Trial.. JAMA, 2021. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.19415.

2. A four-arm, multicentre, single-blind phase 2/3 randomized trial of 480 knee OA patients (KL II-IV) compared autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate, autologous adipose stromal vascular fraction and allogeneic umbilical-cord-tissue mesenchymal stromal cells against a corticosteroid injection control. At 12 months NONE of the three orthobiologic injections was superior to another, or to the corticosteroid control, and none of the four groups showed a significant change in MRI osteoarthritis score from baseline. No procedure-related serious adverse events occurred.

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

3. A 2026 systematic review and meta-analysis of 28 randomized trials of intra-articular mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies in knee OA found significant improvements in several pain and function measures (delta-VAS MD -1.67; KOOS pain MD 15.37) but NO significant difference in WOMAC, KOOS quality of life or the Lequesne index, and MRI-based WORMS scores were non-significant - indicating no consistent structural benefit. Its own conclusion: these therapies serve a primarily SYMPTOM-modifying rather than STRUCTURE-modifying role, with higher frequencies of local reactions to weigh against the symptomatic benefit.

   Awad G, et al. — Efficacy and safety of intra-articular mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies in knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.. Clinical rheumatology, 2026. DOI: 10.1007/s10067-026-08042-w.

4. A GRADE-rated systematic review and meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials (807 participants) found that MSC therapy for chronic knee OA pain PROBABLY RESULTS IN LITTLE TO NO DIFFERENCE in pain relief at 3-6 months (WMD -0.74 cm on a 10 cm VAS against a minimally important difference of 1.5 cm) or physical functioning (WMD 2.23 on the SF-36 100-point subscale against a 10-point MID), both moderate certainty; at 12 months pain was again probably little-to-no-different (WMD -0.73 cm). The measured effect is real but sits BELOW the threshold at which a patient would notice it.

   Sadeghirad B, et al. — Mesenchymal stem cells for chronic knee pain secondary to osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.. Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2024.04.021.

5. FORWARD, the longest disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug trial reported to date, gave intra-articular sprifermin (a recombinant FGF-18) or placebo to knee OA patients and followed 378 of them for 5 years. Sprifermin produced a significant, sustained dose-response INCREASE in total femorotibial cartilage thickness versus placebo - and WOMAC pain improved about 50% from baseline in ALL groups, including placebo. It is the cleanest demonstration in the literature that adding measurable cartilage and relieving pain are two different results, and that one does not deliver the other.

   Eckstein F, et al. — Long-term structural and symptomatic effects of intra-articular sprifermin in patients with knee osteoarthritis: 5-year results from the FORWARD study.. Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2021. DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-219181.

6. FDA states plainly that no stem cell, exosome, stromal vascular fraction, umbilical cord blood, Wharton's jelly or amniotic-fluid product has been approved for the treatment of ANY orthopedic condition - it names osteoarthritis, tendonitis, disc disease, tennis elbow, back pain, hip pain, knee pain, neck pain and shoulder pain individually. The only FDA-approved stem cell products in the United States are cord-blood-derived blood-forming stem cells for disorders of the hematopoietic system, and there are currently no FDA-approved exosome products.

   US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research — Consumer Alert on Regenerative Medicine Products Including Stem Cells and Exosomes. FDA, 2020.