Particulated Juvenile Articular Cartilage and Matrix-Induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation are Cost-Effective for Patellar Chondral Lesions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Drake G. LeBrun ◽  
Benedict U. Nwachukwu ◽  
Stephanie S. Buza ◽  
Simone Gruber ◽  
William A. Marmor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Articular Cartilage ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Chondral Lesions ◽  
Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

scholarly journals Scaffolds for knee chondral lesions – indications and technical tips

2021 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 77-79
Author(s):  
Dawid Szwedowski ◽  
◽  
Marek Starczewski ◽  
Maciej Paszke ◽  
Maciej Jackowiak
Keyword(s):  
Articular Cartilage ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Cartilage Repair ◽  
Tissue Regeneration ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Chondral Lesions ◽  
Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

Chondral lesions following an injury to the knee joint have poor healing potential and may lead to osteoarthritis. Nowadays, more and more research is focused on tissue regeneration and the prevention of osteoarthritis development. Efforts to restore the articular cartilage using advanced procedures like autologous chondrocyte implantation led to the development of scaffolds. Although the use of a scaffold-based technique is a reliable and effective method of cartilage repair, only the appropriate qualification can lead to good clinical outcomes.

Hip Cartilage Restoration: Available Evidence and Current Trends

2018 ◽  
Vol 02 (02) ◽  
pp. 081-087
Author(s):  
Tyler Collins
Keyword(s):  
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Adequate Treatment ◽  
Cartilage Lesions ◽  
Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Osteochondral Grafting ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

AbstractTreatment of cartilage pathology is controversial. In the hip, it is even more so as identification and treatment of early cartilage disease are relatively new and little evidence exists. With the advent and more widespread use of hip arthroscopy, easier access to the hip joint is available, and adequate treatment is possible with less morbidity. Many treatment options exist for cartilage lesions including nonoperative treatment, debridement, microfracture, acetabuloplasty, cartilage fixation, cartilage scaffolds, autologous chondrocyte implantation, and osteochondral grafting. While far from definitive, the current evidence suggests that smaller cartilage lesions (< 4 cm2) have good results with most treatments while larger lesions fare better with treatments that produce hyaline-like cartilage. The most cost-effective arthroscopic treatments of smaller cartilage lesions include acetabuloplasty and microfracture, while larger lesions should be considered for autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis or matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte implantation. Larger cartilage lesions with bone disease are more adequately treated with open procedures such as osteochondral grafting or total hip arthroplasty.

Microfracture Versus Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation for Articular Cartilage Lesions in the Knee: A Systematic Review of 5-Year Outcomes

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 995-999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Kraeutler ◽  
John W. Belk ◽  
Justin M. Purcell ◽  
Eric C. McCarty
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Articular Cartilage ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

Background: Microfracture (MFx) and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) are 2 surgical treatment options used to treat articular cartilage injuries of the knee joint. Purpose: To compare the midterm to long-term clinical outcomes of MFx versus ACI for focal chondral defects of the knee. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to locate studies (level of evidence I-III) comparing the minimum average 5-year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing MFx versus ACI. Search terms used were “knee,” “microfracture,” “autologous chondrocyte implantation,” and “autologous chondrocyte transplantation.” Patients were evaluated based on treatment failure rates, magnetic resonance imaging, and patient-reported outcome scores (Lysholm, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], and Tegner scores). Results: Five studies (3 level I evidence, 2 level II evidence) were identified that met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 210 patients (211 lesions) undergoing MFx and 189 patients (189 lesions) undergoing ACI. The average follow-up among all studies was 7.0 years. Four studies utilized first-generation, periosteum-based ACI (P-ACI), and 1 study utilized third-generation, matrix-associated ACI (M-ACI). Treatment failure occurred in 18.5% of patients undergoing ACI and 17.1% of patients undergoing MFx ( P = .70). Lysholm and KOOS scores were found to improve for both groups across studies, without a significant difference in improvement between the groups. The only significant difference in patient-reported outcome scores was found in the 1 study using M-ACI in which Tegner scores improved to a significantly greater extent in the ACI group compared with the MFx group ( P = .003). Conclusion: Patients undergoing MFx or first/third-generation ACI for articular cartilage lesions in the knee can be expected to experience improvement in clinical outcomes at midterm to long-term follow-up without any significant difference between the groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document