biological augmentation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

48
(FIVE YEARS 19)

H-INDEX

13
(FIVE YEARS 3)

Author(s):  
Bennett E. Propp ◽  
Colin L. Uyeki ◽  
Michael R. Mancini ◽  
Benjamin C. Hawthorne ◽  
Mary Beth McCarthy ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (22) ◽  
pp. 12566
Author(s):  
Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán

Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e289-e295
Author(s):  
Matthew C. Daggett ◽  
Kyle Busch ◽  
Andrea Ferretti ◽  
Edoardo Monaco ◽  
Giorgio Bruni ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Alberto Poggi ◽  
Davide Reale ◽  
Angelo Boffa ◽  
Luca Andriolo ◽  
Alessandro Di Martino ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Nobutake Ozeki ◽  
Romain Seil ◽  
Aaron J Krych ◽  
Hideyuki Koga

The meniscus is important for load distribution, shock absorption and stability of the knee joint. Meniscus injury or meniscectomy results in decreased function of the meniscus and increased risk of knee osteoarthritis. To preserve the meniscal functions, meniscal repair should be considered as the first option for meniscus injury. Although reoperation rates are higher after meniscal repair compared with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, long-term follow-up of meniscal repair demonstrated better clinical outcomes and less severe degenerative changes of osteoarthritis compared with partial meniscectomy. In the past, the indication of a meniscal repair was limited both because of technical reasons and due to the localised vascularity of the meniscus. Meanwhile, it spreads today as the development of the concept to preserve the meniscus and the improvement of meniscal repair techniques. Longitudinal vertical tears in the peripheral third are considered the ‘gold standard’ indication in terms of meniscus healing. Techniques for meniscal repair include ‘inside-out’, ‘outside-in’ and ‘all-inside’ strategies. Surgical decision-making depends on the type, size and location of the meniscus injury. Meniscal root tears substantially affect meniscal hoop function and accelerate cartilage degeneration; therefore, meniscus root repair is necessary to prevent the progression of osteoarthritis change. For symptomatic meniscus defects after meniscectomy, transplantation of allograft or collagen meniscus implant may be indicated, and acceptable clinical results have been obtained. Recently, meniscus extrusion has attracted attention due to increased interest in early osteoarthritis. The centralisation techniques have been proposed to reduce the meniscus extrusion by suturing the meniscus-capsule complex to the edge of the tibial plateau. Long-term clinical outcomes of this procedure may change the strategy of treating meniscus extrusion. When malalignment of the lower leg is accompanied with meniscus pathologies, knee osteotomies are a reasonable option to protect the repaired meniscus by unloading the pathological compartment. Advancements in biological augmentation such as bone marrow stimulation, fibrin clot, platelet-rich plasma, stem cell therapy and scaffolds have also expanded the indications for meniscus surgery. In summary, improved repair techniques and biological augmentation have made meniscus repair more appealing to treat that had previously been considered irreparable. However, further research would be necessary to validate the efficacy of these specialised technique.


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryohei Uchida ◽  
George Jacob ◽  
Kazunori Shimomura ◽  
Shuji Horibe ◽  
Norimasa Nakamura

Author(s):  
Courtney R Carlson Strother ◽  
Daniel B F Saris ◽  
Peter Verdonk ◽  
Norimasa Nakamura ◽  
Aaron J Krych

Meniscus tears range from acute tears during physical activity to chronic degenerative tears. The role of the meniscus in knee stability, load distribution, knee proprioception and arthritis prevention has been well established, and successful repair of meniscus tears has better clinical outcomes and protection from increased degenerative changes. Advancements in surgical techniques have demonstrated meniscus repair is possible in tears previously deemed unsalvageable. In addition, the use of biological augmentation has improved rates of meniscal healing, and the use of biologics is an active area of investigation. In this article, we review current methods of biological augmentation to promote meniscus healing, including biological injections, concomitant procedures and biological membranes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document