scholarly journals Allogeneic Umbilical Cord Blood–Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Implantation Versus Microfracture for Large, Full-Thickness Cartilage Defects in Older Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Extended 5-Year Clinical Follow-up

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 232596712097305
Author(s):  
Hong-Chul Lim ◽  
Yong-Beom Park ◽  
Chul-Won Ha ◽  
Brian J. Cole ◽  
Beom-Koo Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cartilage Repair ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Cartilage Defects ◽  
Full Thickness ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Cartilage Restoration

Background: There is currently no optimal method for cartilage restoration in large, full-thickness cartilage defects in older patients. Purpose: To determine whether implantation of a composite of allogeneic umbilical cord blood–derived mesenchymal stem cells and 4% hyaluronate (UCB-MSC-HA) will result in reliable cartilage restoration in patients with large, full-thickness cartilage defects and whether any clinical improvements can be maintained up to 5 years postoperatively. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A randomized controlled phase 3 clinical trial was conducted for 48 weeks, and the participants then underwent extended 5-year observational follow-up. Enrolled were patients with large, full-thickness cartilage defects (International Cartilage Repair Society [ICRS] grade 4) in a single compartment of the knee joint, as confirmed by arthroscopy. The defect was treated either with UCB-MSC-HA implantation through mini-arthrotomy or with microfracture. The primary outcome was proportion of participants who improved by ≥1 grade on the ICRS Macroscopic Cartilage Repair Assessment (blinded evaluation) at 48-week arthroscopy. Secondary outcomes included histologic assessment; changes in pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score from baseline; and adverse events. Results: Among 114 randomized participants (mean age, 55.9 years; 67% female; body mass index, 26.2 kg/m2), 89 completed the phase 3 clinical trial and 73 were enrolled in the 5-year follow-up study. The mean defect size was 4.9 cm2 in the UCB-MSC-HA group and 4.0 cm2 in the microfracture group ( P = .051). At 48 weeks, improvement by ≥1 ICRS grade was seen in 97.7% of the UCB-MSC-HA group versus 71.7% of the microfracture group ( P = .001); the overall histologic assessment score was also superior in the UCB-MSC-HA group ( P = .036). Improvement in VAS pain, WOMAC, and IKDC scores were not significantly different between the groups at 48 weeks, however the clinical results were significantly better in the UCB-MSC-HA group at 3- to 5-year follow-up ( P < .05). There were no differences between the groups in adverse events. Conclusion: In older patients with symptomatic, large, full-thickness cartilage defects with or without osteoarthritis, UCB-MSC-HA implantation resulted in improved cartilage grade at second-look arthroscopy and provided more improvement in pain and function up to 5 years compared with microfracture. Registration: NCT01041001, NCT01626677 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Matrix-Applied Characterized Autologous Cultured Chondrocytes Versus Microfracture: Five-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 1343-1351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mats Brittberg ◽  
David Recker ◽  
John Ilgenfritz ◽  
Daniel B.F. Saris ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Extension Study ◽  
Cartilage Defects ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
And Function ◽  
Mri Evaluation ◽  
Cultured Chondrocytes

Background: Matrix-based cell therapy improves surgical handling, increases patient comfort, and allows for expanded indications with better reliability within the knee joint. Five-year efficacy and safety of autologous cultured chondrocytes on porcine collagen membrane (MACI) versus microfracture for treating cartilage defects have not yet been reported from any randomized controlled clinical trial. Purpose: To examine the clinical efficacy and safety results at 5 years after treatment with MACI and compare these with the efficacy and safety of microfracture treatment for symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: This article describes the 5-year follow-up of the SUMMIT (Superiority of MACI Implant Versus Microfracture Treatment) clinical trial conducted at 14 study sites in Europe. All 144 patients who participated in SUMMIT were eligible to enroll; analyses of the 5-year data were performed with data from patients who signed informed consent and continued in the Extension study. Results: Of the 144 patients randomized in the SUMMIT trial, 128 signed informed consent and continued observation in the Extension study: 65 MACI (90.3%) and 63 microfracture (87.5%). The improvements in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain and Function domains previously described were maintained over the 5-year follow-up. Five years after treatment, the improvement in MACI over microfracture in the co-primary endpoint of KOOS pain and function was maintained and was clinically and statistically significant ( P = .022). Improvements in activities of daily living remained statistically significantly better ( P = .007) in MACI patients, with quality of life and other symptoms remaining numerically higher in MACI patients but losing statistical significance relative to the results of the SUMMIT 2-year analysis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation of structural repair was performed in 120 patients at year 5. As in the 2-year SUMMIT (MACI00206) results, the MRI evaluation showed improvement in defect filling for both treatments; however, no statistically significant differences were noted between treatment groups. Conclusion: Symptomatic cartilage knee defects 3 cm2 or larger treated with MACI were clinically and statistically significantly improved at 5 years compared with microfracture treatment. No remarkable adverse events or safety issues were noted in this heterogeneous patient population.

Arthroscopic Matrix-Assisted Autologous Chondrocyte Transplantation Versus Microfracture: A 6-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110104
Author(s):  
Clemente Ibarra ◽  
Enrique Villalobos ◽  
Antonio Madrazo-Ibarra ◽  
Cristina Velasquillo ◽  
Valentin Martinez-Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cartilage Repair ◽  
T2 Mapping ◽  
Chondrocyte Transplantation ◽  
Knee Cartilage ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Preoperative Status ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

Background: Few randomized controlled trials with a midterm follow-up have compared matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) with microfracture (MFx) for knee cartilage lesions. Purpose: To compare the structural, clinical, and safety outcomes at midterm follow-up of MACT versus MFx for treating symptomatic knee cartilage lesions. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 48 patients aged between 18 and 50 years, with 1- to 4-cm2 International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade III to IV knee chondral lesions, were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the MACT and MFx treatment groups. A sequential prospective evaluation was performed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) T2 mapping, the MOCART (magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue) score, second-look arthroscopic surgery, patient-reported outcome measures, the responder rate (based on achieving the minimal clinically important difference for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] pain and KOOS Sport/Recreation), adverse events, and treatment failure (defined as a reoperation because of symptoms caused by the primary defect and the detachment or absence of >50% of the repaired tissue during revision surgery). Results: Overall, 35 patients (18 MACT and 17 MFx) with a mean chondral lesion size of 1.8 ± 0.8 cm2 (range, 1-4 cm2) were followed up to a mean of 6 years postoperatively (range, 4-9 years). MACT demonstrated significantly better structural outcomes than MFx at 1 to 6 years postoperatively. At final follow-up, the MRI T2 mapping values of the repaired tissue were 37.7 ± 8.5 ms for MACT versus 46.4 ± 8.5 ms for MFx ( P = .003), while the MOCART scores were 59.4 ± 17.3 and 42.4 ± 16.3, respectively ( P = .006). More than 50% defect filling was seen in 95% of patients at 2 years and 82% at 6 years in the MACT group and in 67% at 2 years and 53% at 6 years in the MFx group. The second-look ICRS scores at 1 year were 10.7 ± 1.3 for MACT and 9.0 ± 1.8 for MFx ( P = .001). Both groups showed significant clinical improvements at 6 years postoperatively compared with their preoperative status. Significant differences favoring the MACT group were observed at 2 years on the KOOS Activities of Daily Living ( P = .043), at 4 years on all KOOS subscales (except Symptoms; P < .05) and the Tegner scale ( P = .008), and at 6 years on the Tegner scale ( P = .010). The responder rates at 6 years were 53% and 77% for MFx and MACT, respectively. There were no reported treatment failures after MACT; the failure rate was 8.3% in the MFx group. Neither group had serious adverse events related to treatment. Conclusion: Patients who underwent MACT had better structural outcomes than those who underwent MFx at 1 to 6 years postoperatively. Both groups of patients showed significant clinical improvements at final follow-up compared with their preoperative status. MACT showed superiority at 4 years for the majority of the KOOS subscales and for the Tegner scale at 4 to 6 years. The MACT group also had a higher responder rate and lower failure rate at final follow-up. Registration: NCT01947374 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document