Stem Cell Therapy in Atlanta.
What bone marrow aspirate concentrate is
Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate, BMAC for short, describes a technique, not a product in a box. The aspirate part is the drawing out of bone marrow with a needle. The concentrate part is the processing that follows.
The sample is generally taken from the pelvis, because this is one of the widest areas of bone you can access with a needle. Then processing removes certain components from the sample and concentrates others. The material that ends up in the syringe is a mixture of platelets, platelet-derived growth factors and many different types of cells.
The cells the label leans on make up just a small fraction of the final mixture; that fraction is the most useful fact in this whole conversation. Blood is the starting material for PRP injections, and marrow is the starting material here. The two differ in what they collect before they differ in anything else. Two marrow samples obtained from different machines are also not necessarily the same substance.
And how the substance is assumed to function has changed with time. Originally, the concept was that the injected cells would settle into a damaged surface and turn into new cartilage. The current thinking is more about signaling: the concentrate does not rebuild the joint but alters the environment around it. That is a less ambitious hypothesis, and it is the one that can be tested.
Another distinction from a simple injection is that marrow has to be collected first: two places on your body are involved, and each carries its own risk. Bruising, bleeding, infection, nerve damage, worse pain, and no gain at all are risks to talk through beforehand.
None of those risks decides whether this is the right treatment for your joint. The terms are now explained; the dialogue begins from here.
What people are asking for when they ask about stem cell therapy
The question underneath "stem cell therapy" is simpler: "Can I have something injected that will make my joint grow back?" The best response is to untangle the words from the procedure.
In an orthopedic office, "stem cell therapy" almost always refers to a preparation done on the same day using either bone marrow or fat from your own body. What it doesn't refer to should also be stated as clearly. It does not mean stem cells that have been isolated and grown in a lab before reaching you, or umbilical and amniotic tissue from another person. Those are distinct entities governed by different regulations, and if a clinic applies a single label to them all, it makes your decision that much more confusing.
A separate category again is peptide therapy, lab-produced rather than sourced from your own body, and it warrants its own discussion.
Back to the same-day preparations: the cells the name refers to are mesenchymal stromal cells, found in both bone marrow and fat. Any preparation from either tissue will contain them along with many others. That said, their mere presence does not mean they are the therapeutic component. No online resource can tell you what proportion of the cells in your own preparation would be mesenchymal stromal cells.
There are three separate assertions that have all been bundled together under one label, and they are not equivalent. Improvement in symptoms and improvement in function are the only two for which there is any scientific evidence. Regeneration of new cartilage is the third. Evidence in favor of the former two does not mean there is evidence in favor of the latter. One large trial evaluating injections showed no evidence of structural joint regeneration on imaging at the time of follow-up.
So the benefit question does have an answer, just a smaller one than the marketing implies. Scientific data support improvements in symptoms and function for certain indications. Much of the evidence is from studies of osteoarthritis of the knee. It remains unknown whether these benefits extend to other joints like the shoulder or hip, or to chronic tendon pathology. As for the rest, the standard across regenerative medicine on this site is the same. Options get sorted by what they have shown, not by what they are called.
Watch for nods of approval in disguise: registered with a federal agency, posted in a trial registry, autologous, meaning derived from you. Each can be true of a product that has no approval for the condition in question.
When someone makes that pitch, ask for the regulatory classification out loud, and pay attention to whether the answer is precise.
BMAC compared with microfragmented adipose tissue
Fat is the other tissue source for a same-day preparation, and four questions separate it from marrow.
None of it makes for a clear winner. Neither approach has been proven to reliably regenerate healthy cartilage. The studies mix so many cell types, handling methods and severity levels that the names are easier to tell apart than the treatments. So the decision rests on the diagnosis, the evidence for it, the burden of the harvest, and your own goals, in that order.
-
Where each one comes from.
Bone marrow aspirate concentrate begins inside the bone, most commonly the pelvis. Microfragmented adipose tissue, or MFAT, begins in fat, taken as a small sample. Different tissue, same body, and that distinction permeates everything below.
-
What the collection asks of you.
Either way you get two small procedures in one visit, the harvest and the injection, each with its own soreness. A fat collection carries its own list too: bruising, inflammation, changes in shape at the harvest site.
-
What the processing leaves behind.
Marrow is spun to concentrate platelets, growth factors and a cocktail of cell types into a small volume.
Fat is instead mechanically disrupted, retaining its extracellular matrix and the cellular components within. Nor is it the enzymatically processed or lab-grown product available elsewhere.
-
What the evidence supports.
Randomized studies of marrow in knee arthritis report improved symptoms. A systematic review of those trials found no clear edge over the treatments it faced.
Improvement is also reported for fat preparations: the randomized trial against a platelet preparation showed improvement in both arms, with neither gaining an advantage.
Whether insurance covers these treatments
The honest answer starts with the fact that marrow and fat don't fit neatly into benefit rules. Coverage depends on your plan and the specific procedure, because two distinct services are involved: the evaluation, and the procedure itself.
For the evaluation, which is the visit, the exam, and any imaging that's ordered, you follow standard orthopedic benefit rules. For the procedure itself, being a biologic procedure, there are separate rules that differ by plan, and that classification is what decides coverage. An answer someone else got under a different plan tells you nothing about yours.
The order of events matters, too. There can be no biologic procedure without a diagnosis. Therefore, your initial call to your insurance carrier should be about an orthopedic consultation, rather than about marrow or fat.
Call the number on the back of your insurance card and ask three things. Is a referral needed to see an orthopedist? Does imaging need prior approval? And how does the plan class the exact procedure you are weighing? Each type of biologic is classified differently. If your plan provides the information in writing, request it.
The difference has a reason, and it is why this answer is not the one you would get about a steroid injection. Most treatments have been around for quite some time, and as such they are well understood and incorporated into benefits programs. Newer treatments, still accumulating evidence, are far more likely to sit outside those programs, which is why a marrow or fat procedure may end up out-of-pocket. That is why the call worth making first is about the consultation: request an appointment, and the benefits question gets worked alongside the diagnosis rather than after it.
How Atlanta Sports Medicine Institute uses bone marrow concentrate
Marrow concentrate is not an answer for every arthritic joint, and advertising routinely fails to say so. Whether it fits you hangs on four things: the diagnosis, the tissues involved, your goals, and the evidence for that exact mix. Age on its own does not decide it, which surprises people on both sides of the question.
The order doesn't change: diagnosis precedes treatment, based on clinical findings and imaging studies that guide the decision. The options run from nonoperative care, rehabilitation, activity modification and orthotics among them, through to surgery, depending on the diagnosis.
Biologics are considered a component of the treatment plan, with specific indications and a point at which to reassess the plan. Sometimes the question isn't whether to replace surgery with biologics but whether biologics should be incorporated into a surgical plan. Marrow products have also been examined in that setting, used in addition to a procedure, not instead of. Whether a biologic belongs inside knee surgery you already need is a different question from whether it can help you avoid the operation. Either way, the intention underneath is the same: keep the joint you were born with functioning for as long as it can. Choose the path that protects the tissue, not the one with the most technology behind it. That is the joint preservation frame, and a biologic either qualifies for inclusion in the frame or it doesn't. A good consultation enables you to state three things out loud. One is what human data backs up your own diagnosis. Two is whether the goal is symptom control, improved function, or help with healing during a repair. Three is what the strategy is if nothing works. If one or more of those three items is not clear when you're done, then the discussion is incomplete.
Most of the effort in that discussion is reading a murky evidence base, and the training behind that reading is on the record: Graduated cum laude from the University of Notre Dame; earned an MS in physiology and biophysics and an MD from Georgetown University; completed orthopedic surgery residency at Brown University. Fellow of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (FAAOS).
Many Atlanta patients come in with a printout and a product name already selected. Very few come in with the diagnosis that would indicate whether the product matters. Much of the first visit is sorting that out. It starts at the exam table, not at the syringe.
Start with clarity about your joint.
If pain is limiting the way you train, work, sleep, or move, an evaluation can turn uncertainty into a practical next-step plan.
Book an appointment →-
A focused conversation
Explain what you want to return to, not only what hurts.
-
A whole-joint assessment
Look for the combination of findings that best explains the symptoms.
-
A clear next-step plan
Understand the likely cause, whether imaging helps, and what comes next.
Care built around diagnosis, clarity, and durable function.
Atlanta Sports Medicine Institute helps active patients understand what may be driving their symptoms and compare appropriate treatment paths. The experience should be precise, understandable, and tied to the activities each patient wants to return to.
What is the success rate of Lipogems?
There is no single honest rate, because the question already contains the problem. Lipogems is the name of a device used to create microfragmented adipose tissue, not a name for every fat-derived treatment. Any percentage attached to it comes from whatever trial used its product. A rate reported without the indication, the preparation method, the comparator and the outcome measured is a number without a context. The comparison earlier on this page is the honest reporting shape: improvement shown for both preparations, and no difference between them.
What do reviews say about A2M injections?
No matter how many reviews you look at, they're not the right tool to answer that question. One person's experience won't tell you how many didn't get better, what else they were doing, or if there was any change within their joint. Alpha-2-macroglobulin (A2M), an existing protein found in the blood, is being touted as an anti-inflammatory. To evaluate it, you would want the name of the specific product, its standing with regulators, and trial evidence for your diagnosis specifically.
What is BMAC?
Bone marrow aspirate concentrate (that's what the acronym stands for) is exactly the same thing that is described at the top of this page, not a different treatment. The name itself tells you exactly what is collected and what is done to it, and nothing at all about what it does for you. One practical difference: the marrow has to be collected before it can be injected, which means two sites on your body where a blood-based preparation needs only one.
Ready to be seen? Book an appointment.
Tell us what is bothering you and we will get you in front of the right person.