← Recovery Explorer

The Comeback / Patient Experience 001

MY ACL LOOKED BETTER.
BUT WAS IT ACTUALLY STABLE?

My experience with bone marrow-derived regenerative treatment, encouraging MRI findings, improved knee function, and the injury that eventually led me back to surgery.

Firsthand experience — founder's account

A personal account, not a clinical trial, independent verification of efficacy or medical recommendation. Medical records and the exact treatment product have not been independently verified.

Published 2026-10-17 · Last editorial review 2026-10-17 · Historical account; treatment year not supplied

01 / My account

The injury that brought me here.

I was a Division I college basketball player before I played rugby. During college, I hyperextended my knee. Later, changing direction in a rugby game, I suffered a more serious ACL injury with associated meniscus damage.

I pursued regenerative treatment at Centeno-Schultz Clinic in Broomfield, Colorado. This is my account of that experience—not an independently verified medical history.

02 / My account

A conversation about uncertainty.

I met with Dr. Markle. As I remember it, he explained that the gap between my injured ACL and its bone attachment point was slightly larger than ideal. He said he had seen successful outcomes in patients with larger gaps.

I appreciated his transparency about the limitations and uncertainty. This is a recollection of our conversation, not a verified quotation, success rate or evidence that a smaller gap predicts success.

03 / My account

The procedure, as I remember it.

The treatment targeted my right knee, including the ACL and meniscus. Bone marrow was collected from my hip and processed the same day. There were approximately four hours between collection and treatment; I left to get food and a haircut before returning.

I recall fluoroscopy-guided needle placement with contrast dye to assess positioning around or within the injured ACL. I cannot confirm precise needle location, injected volume, cell counts or cellular retention without procedural records.

My account is consistent with a same-day bone marrow-derived procedure, but the exact preparation has not been independently verified. It should not be identified definitively as BMAC or a particular Regenexx protocol.

I received Valium. The procedure itself was not painful for me, although I had some discomfort the next day. That does not guarantee a painless experience for anyone else, and post-procedure inflammation is not proof of healing.

04 / My account

Recovery and the changes I felt.

I remember wearing a short knee brace, walking as tolerated, restricting exercise for approximately one month, and gradually returning to physical activity. These were my individual instructions, not a universal rehabilitation protocol.

Over time, my knee felt more stable and more resistant to hyperextension. Around two months after treatment, it began to feel more capable of resisting movements that had worried me. Those improvements continued over subsequent months.

These are patient-reported changes in how my knee felt and functioned—not proof that a specific treatment restored the ligament's attachment.

05 / My account

An encouraging MRI. Remaining laxity.

I recall encouraging follow-up MRI findings, while physical examination still showed some knee laxity. My treating physician was optimistic that stability might continue to improve.

An improved image did not mean my knee was mechanically stable. It also did not prove injected cells had caused ligament healing.

06 / My account

Why I eventually returned to surgery.

Approximately two years after the initial rugby injury, I injured the knee again while standing up after kneeling at work. A bucket-handle meniscus tear was identified.

During later surgery, I was told that much of the ACL tissue looked good, but its attachment to the bone remained incomplete. I remember being told that approximately 40% remained attached.

I had an ACL repair and meniscus repair rather than a conventional ACL reconstruction. My understanding, informed by conversations with treating clinicians, is that insufficient ACL stability contributed to the meniscus injury. That interpretation has not been independently established here.

07 / My account

Would I do it again?

My experience at Centeno-Schultz was positive. I appreciated Dr. Markle's transparency, felt comfortable during the procedure, and noticed meaningful improvements in how my knee felt and functioned.

I would seriously consider a similar treatment again under the right circumstances.

But my experience also showed me the importance of understanding whether an injured ligament can achieve adequate attachment and mechanical stability.

I would encourage anyone considering regenerative treatment to discuss their individual anatomy, the available evidence, the alternatives, and the uncertainties with qualified specialists.

08 / My account

Still rebuilding.

My recovery continued to include setbacks, including a subsequent knee arthroscopy. Today, I am rebuilding strength and confidence, playing recreational basketball and flag football at reduced intensity, and hoping to return to rugby when ready.

I am not fully recovered. This account is not medical clearance, a blanket recommendation or a promise about anyone else's recovery.

“MY MRI LOOKED PROMISING. MY KNEE FELT BETTER. BUT STABILITY WAS STILL THE MISSING PIECE.”

Patient-reported improvement, imaging appearance, structural attachment and mechanical stability are distinct outcomes. One cannot stand in for all the others.

Financial disclosure: sponsorship, referral fees and any financial relationship have not been verified. This account is not an independent clinic endorsement.

Our approach

We separate personal experience from scientific evidence, explain what is known and unknown, and examine recovery treatments without promising outcomes.

Evidence is condition- and outcome-specific, not a universal effectiveness or safety score. Firsthand accounts are not clinical trials. Clinic-reported facts are labeled; unknown details remain unverified. Any established sponsorship or referral relationship must be disclosed, not presented as an independent recommendation.

Educational information, not medical advice. Medical treatment decisions belong with qualified healthcare professionals. Medical disclaimer