Yet Another Marrow Cellutions Review…

By Chris Centeno, MD /

Receive a Regenexx® Patient Info Packet by email and learn why it's a superior regenerative solution.

marrow cellutions

Last summer we completed our internal lab testing of an expensive trocar that claimed to be able to concentrate stem cells as the marrow was drawn. The device didn’t perform as advertised, and I had hoped to never write about it again. However, since then, new data has been published by the company, so it was time to refresh my last review.

The Bone Marrow Draw—Understanding What This Is All About

Any bone marrow stem cell procedure begins with a draw procedure where an aspirate is harvested. This procedure involves numbing the area at the back of the hip and then using imaging guidance to draw out what looks like thick blood. The number of stem cells you get depends on how the draw is performed. That last part may surprise some patients, as most would believe that there is some standard way this is done and how the procedure is performed has little bearing on the outcome of their process, but they would be wrong.

First, drawing bone marrow to maximize stem cells is a paradoxical affair. Meaning, you would think that the more volume you draw, the most stem cells you get. Not really. What actually happens is that there are many more stem cells in the first few ml’s of the draw than there are after that point. Why does this happen?

The problem is that mesenchymal stem cells live locally and are usually stuck to the bone and blood vessels. In addition, the entire bone marrow space communicates with the peripheral vascular circulation. Hence, when you draw that first small volume after the needle is in the bone marrow cavity, you pull off the local stem cells from where they live. After that, you’re mostly just drawing blood as you would from a vein, and blood is stem cell poor.

Despite this fact, 95% of doctors performing a stem cell harvest do it wrong. They insert the needle and then draw a large volume, which ensures that the draw has few stem cells. What they should be doing is inserting the needle and then pulling only a tiny volume and then repositioning the needle to a new spot and drawing a small volume and then repeating until they get the desired amount. The problem? The latter type of draw is too time-consuming, and patients rarely know the difference, so the doctor can substitute his convenience at the expense of the patient’s procedure outcome.

To learn more about this topic, see my video below:

The Marrow Cellutions or Maxx-Regen or Ranfac Device

Doctors often concentrate bone marrow by centrifuging it and then separating out the fraction that has the stem cells. Most doctors use bedside machines to do this that frankly leave many cells on the table and discarded, so we have always used our own processing protocols and a flexible lab platform. To learn more about what we do with a centrifuge and why it’s different, see my video below:

Despite these differences, a number of years ago a company came out with a very expensive trocar to draw bone marrow. Usually, a simple Jamshidi needle is used, but this one, because of its unique design, claimed to be able to skip the centrifuge step. This, of course, would be a huge time-saver, if it were true. Hence, we set out to test the device. Why? First, we don’t believe the claims of any company selling us a product and always independently test those claims. Second, if this were true and we still further centrifuged our bone marrow after drawing it with this device, we could get even more stem cells to help our patients.

Hence, in the summer of 2017, we tested a few of these devices. What happened? In a properly designed head-to-head comparison where we as doctors blinded our on-site research lab as to which sample was which, the device failed miserably. The results are below:

What’s shown? The height of the bars is the stem cell content per unit volume. The comparison is between the second set of bars (the device alone) and the third (a Jamshidi needle plus our concentration protocol). As you can see, our method smoked the device. In fact, the results were so bad, we decided that purchasing the device for our network sites made no sense.

I’ve also summarized all of this in a video:

The New Data

Companies that are trying to sell devices will frequently produce white papers to show that their doohickey is better. This one was published in 2017, likely shortly after my blogs on the topic. It has all of the same problems as all of the Marrow Cellutions white papers I have seen, and, in short, it claims to compare apples to apples but compares apples to oranges.

The white paper in question purports to compare the Marrow Cellutions (MC) device to a bedside centrifuge made by Emcyte. While I’m no fan of simple bedside centrifuges, this document claims that the MC device outperformed the centrifuge and produced more stem cells. However, this only happened because of some sleight of hand performed in this small study.

Remember where I said that how you draw the marrow is critical for producing high stem cell numbers? Well, the MC device makes you pull the marrow very differently. It requires that you draw small volumes from many spots, and it’s this method that produces more cells. However, the manufacturer of this expensive device wants you to believe that it’s the device and not the method. Hence, they never test the device against less costly trocars or needles using the same type of low-volume draw procedure. When we did that, the device didn’t work as advertised.

For this white paper, the authors compared the MC device on one side of the pelvis to a large-volume draw on the other side. This is not an apples-to-apples comparison, as you now know that if we draw larger volumes of marrow, we get fewer stem cells. The MC device makes you draw smaller volumes from more sites; hence, we would expect more stem cells per unit volume. This is what this advertising white paper found. Again, what should have been done was to compare the MC device to the other side with the same small volumes being taken from multiple sites.

Hence, to use a common-sense example, this paper purports to be about the sweetness of apples but then tests the sweetness of apples versus oranges. It then somehow concludes that the manufacturer’s apples are sweeter than other manufacturers apples, but it never tested against any other apples. Basically, the white paper is more sleight of hand than science.

The Doctors Using This Device Have Another Problem—Reality

If a doctor has decided to use this device, since it produces something utterly different from bone marrow concentrate (BMC), the doctor has a problem. There’s quite a bit of research published that BMC (a same-day stem cell procedure) can help orthopedic issues (much of that published by our group). All of that research doesn’t apply to what you’re doing with the MC device. Hence, you need to be honest with your patient that you’re trying a new procedure for which no published clinical data exists.

Given that the MC device produces a stem-cell-poor product compared to a best practices bone marrow harvest and concentration through centrifugation, this is yet another problem. Why? Multiple studies have shown that the successful outcome of these procedures is tied directly to the stem cell content of what’s injected. For more information on that issue, see my video below:

The upshot? There continues to be no compelling data that the Marrow Cellutions device works as advertised. In fact, we showed that this expensive device worked no better than a cheap trocar used the right way. So, we’ll still steer clear of this device!

Category: Latest News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

2 thoughts on “Yet Another Marrow Cellutions Review…

  1. John Bird

    In your promotional material, you claim self-donated bone marrow stems cells are superior to other sources. You support this by comparing fat and/or amnionic fluid derived stem cells to your methodology. Some of your competitors claim umbilical and/or placental derived stem cells are superior since these “younger cells” are more plentiful and more vigorous. Your promotional material does not address this issue.
    Also, one’s bone marrow plays an important in the immune system. Doesn’t withdrawing a large amount of bone marrow, especially from older patients, who have lower stem cell volume in their marrow, somewhat compromise their immune system?

    1. Regenexx Team

      John,
      There are no live and functional stem cells in the amniotic and umbilical cord products being used by physicians or chiropractic offices here in the U.S.. These are dead cell products. Your bone marrow stem cells are alive and functional. How do we know that? They are responsible for keeping you alive. As far as immune function is concerned, the cells we withdraw are replaced in days to weeks. Please see: https://regenexx.com/blog/amniotic-stem-cells-great-deception/ and https://regenexx.com/blog/does-cord-blood-have-mesenchymal-stem-cells/ and https://regenexx.com/blog/stem-cell-therapy-pain-stem-cell-health-centers/ and https://regenexx.com/blog/sport-and-spine-spa/ and https://regenexx.com/blog/foot-arch-knee-pain/ and https://regenexx.com/blog/liveyon-review/

Chris Centeno, MD

Regenexx Founder

Chris Centeno, MD is a specialist in regenerative medicine and the new field of Interventional Orthopedics. Centeno pioneered orthopedic stem cell procedures in 2005 and is responsible for a large amount of the published research on stem cell use for orthopedic applications.
View Profile

Get Blog Updates by Email

Get fresh updates and insights from Regenexx delivered straight to your inbox.

Regenerative procedures are commonly used to treat musculoskelatal trauma, overuse injuries, and degenerative issues, including failed surgeries.
Select Your Problem Area
Shoulder

Shoulder

Many Shoulder and Rotator Cuff injuries are good candidates for regenerative treatments. Before considering shoulder arthroscopy or shoulder replacement, consider an evaluation of your condition with a regenerative treatment specialist.

  • Rotator Cuff Tears and Tendinitis
  • Shoulder Instability
  • SLAP Tear / Labral Tears
  • Shoulder Arthritis
  • Other Degenerative Conditions & Overuse Injuries
Learn More
Cervical Spine

Spine

Many spine injuries and degenerative conditions are good candidates for regenerative treatments and there are a number of studies showing promising results in treating a wide range of spine problems. Spine surgery should be a last resort for anyone, due to the cascade of negative effects it can have on the areas surrounding the surgery. And epidural steroid injections are problematic due to their long-term negative impact on bone density.

  • Herniated, Bulging, Protruding Discs
  • Degenerative Disc Disease
  • SI Joint Syndrome
  • Sciatica
  • Pinched Nerves and General Back Pain
  • And more
Learn More
Knee

Knees

Knees are the target of many common sports injuries. Sadly, they are also the target of a number of surgeries that research has frequently shown to be ineffective or minimally effective. Knee arthritis can also be a common cause for aging athletes to abandon the sports and activities they love. Regenerative procedures can be used to treat a wide range of knee injuries and conditions. They can even be used to reduce pain and delay knee replacement for more severe arthritis.

  • Knee Meniscus Tears
  • Knee ACL Tears
  • Knee Instability
  • Knee Osteoarthritis
  • Other Knee Ligaments / Tendons & Overuse Injuries
  • And more
Learn More
Lower Spine

Spine

Many spine injuries and degenerative conditions are good candidates for regenerative treatments and there are a number of studies showing promising results in treating a wide range of spine problems. Spine surgery should be a last resort for anyone, due to the cascade of negative effects it can have on the areas surrounding the surgery. And epidural steroid injections are problematic due to their long-term negative impact on bone density.

  • Herniated, Bulging, Protruding Discs
  • Degenerative Disc Disease
  • SI Joint Syndrome
  • Sciatica
  • Pinched Nerves and General Back Pain
  • And more
Learn More
Hand & Wrist

Hand & Wrist

Hand and wrist injuries and arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and conditions relating to overuse of the thumb, are good candidates for regenerative treatments. Before considering surgery, consider an evaluation of your condition with a regenerative treatment specialist.
  • Hand and Wrist Arthritis
  • Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
  • Trigger Finger
  • Thumb Arthritis (Basal Joint, CMC, Gamer’s Thumb, Texting Thumb)
  • Other conditions that cause pain
Learn More
Elbow

Elbow

Most injuries of the elbow’s tendons and ligaments, as well as arthritis, can be treated non-surgically with regenerative procedures.

  • Golfer’s elbow & Tennis elbow
  • Arthritis
  • Ulnar collateral ligament wear (common in baseball pitchers)
  • And more
Learn More
Hip

Hip

Hip injuries and degenerative conditions become more common with age. Do to the nature of the joint, it’s not quite as easy to injure as a knee, but it can take a beating and pain often develops over time. Whether a hip condition is acute or degenerative, regenerative procedures can help reduce pain and may help heal injured tissue, without the complications of invasive surgical hip procedures.

  • Labral Tear
  • Hip Arthritis
  • Hip Bursitis
  • Hip Sprain, Tendonitis or Inflammation
  • Hip Instability
Learn More
Foot & Ankle

Foot & Ankle

Foot and ankle injuries are common in athletes. These injuries can often benefit from non-surgical regenerative treatments. Before considering surgery, consider an evaluation of your condition with a regenerative treatment specialist.
  • Ankle Arthritis
  • Plantar fasciitis
  • Ligament sprains or tears
  • Other conditions that cause pain
Learn More

Is Regenexx Right For You?

Request a free Regenexx Info Packet

REGENEXX WEBINARS

Learn about the #1 Stem Cell & Platelet Procedures for treating arthritis, common joint injuries & spine pain.

Join a Webinar

RECEIVE BLOG ARTICLES BY EMAIL

Get fresh updates and insights from Regenexx delivered straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to the Blog

FOLLOW US

Copyright © Regenexx 2019. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

*DISCLAIMER: Like all medical procedures, Regenexx® Procedures have a success and failure rate. Patient reviews and testimonials on this site should not be interpreted as a statement on the effectiveness of our treatments for anyone else.

Providers listed on the Regenexx website are for informational purposes only and are not a recommendation from Regenexx for a specific provider or a guarantee of the outcome of any treatment you receive.