Differential analysis of the impact of lesions' location on clinical and radiological outcomes after the implantation of a novel aragonite-based scaffold to treat knee cartilage defects.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
International Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-21 DOI:10.1007/s00264-024-06314-1
Pietro Conte, Giuseppe Anzillotti, Dennis C Crawford, Vinod Dasa, David C Flanigan, William E Nordt, Jason M Scopp, Robert J Meislin, Eric J Strauss, Sabrina M Strickland, Gennaro Fiorentino, Christian Lattermann
{"title":"Differential analysis of the impact of lesions' location on clinical and radiological outcomes after the implantation of a novel aragonite-based scaffold to treat knee cartilage defects.","authors":"Pietro Conte, Giuseppe Anzillotti, Dennis C Crawford, Vinod Dasa, David C Flanigan, William E Nordt, Jason M Scopp, Robert J Meislin, Eric J Strauss, Sabrina M Strickland, Gennaro Fiorentino, Christian Lattermann","doi":"10.1007/s00264-024-06314-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>There is limited comparative evidence on patient outcomes following cartilage repair in various knee compartments. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and imaging outcomes after treating cartilage defects in femoral condyles and trochlea with either an aragonite-based scaffold or surgical standard of care (SSoC, i.e., debridement/microfractures) in a large multicentre randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>247 patients with up to three knee joint surface lesions (ICRS grade IIIa or above) in the femoral condyles, trochlea or both (\"mixed\"), were enrolled and randomized to surgery with either a cell-free aragonite scaffold or SSoC. Patients were followed for up to 48 months by analysing subjective scores (KOOS and IKDC), radiological outcomes (defect filling on MRI), as well as treatment failure rates and adverse events. A differential analysis of outcomes for condylar, trochlear and mixed lesions was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The scaffold group significantly outperformed the SSoC group regardless of lesion location with statistically significantly better KOOS Overall scores at 24 months (all p ≤ 0.0009) and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.02). Similar results were observed for KOOS subscales and IKDC scores. For KOOS responder rates, superiority of the implant group was demonstrated at 24, 36, and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.004). Higher defect filling on MRI for implants was observed for all locations. Lower treatment failure rates for the implant were observed in condylar and mixed lesions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective regardless of the defect location, providing superior clinical and radiological outcomes compared to SSoC up to four years follow-up.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>I - Randomized controlled trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":14450,"journal":{"name":"International Orthopaedics","volume":" ","pages":"3117-3126"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11564388/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06314-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: There is limited comparative evidence on patient outcomes following cartilage repair in various knee compartments. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and imaging outcomes after treating cartilage defects in femoral condyles and trochlea with either an aragonite-based scaffold or surgical standard of care (SSoC, i.e., debridement/microfractures) in a large multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Methods: 247 patients with up to three knee joint surface lesions (ICRS grade IIIa or above) in the femoral condyles, trochlea or both ("mixed"), were enrolled and randomized to surgery with either a cell-free aragonite scaffold or SSoC. Patients were followed for up to 48 months by analysing subjective scores (KOOS and IKDC), radiological outcomes (defect filling on MRI), as well as treatment failure rates and adverse events. A differential analysis of outcomes for condylar, trochlear and mixed lesions was performed.

Results: The scaffold group significantly outperformed the SSoC group regardless of lesion location with statistically significantly better KOOS Overall scores at 24 months (all p ≤ 0.0009) and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.02). Similar results were observed for KOOS subscales and IKDC scores. For KOOS responder rates, superiority of the implant group was demonstrated at 24, 36, and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.004). Higher defect filling on MRI for implants was observed for all locations. Lower treatment failure rates for the implant were observed in condylar and mixed lesions.

Conclusion: The aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective regardless of the defect location, providing superior clinical and radiological outcomes compared to SSoC up to four years follow-up.

Level of evidence: I - Randomized controlled trial.

植入新型文石基支架治疗膝关节软骨缺损后,病变位置对临床和放射学结果影响的差异分析。
目的:关于膝关节不同部位软骨修复后患者疗效的比较证据有限。本研究旨在通过大型多中心随机对照试验,比较使用文石支架或外科标准护理(SSoC,即:清创/微骨折)治疗股骨髁和蹄骨软骨缺损后的临床和影像学效果、方法:247 名膝关节表面病变(ICRS IIIa 级或以上)患者被纳入研究,他们的股骨髁、蹄关节或两者("混合")最多有三个膝关节表面病变(ICRS IIIa 级或以上),他们被随机分配接受无细胞文石支架或 SSoC 手术治疗。通过分析主观评分(KOOS 和 IKDC)、放射学结果(核磁共振成像上的缺损填充)以及治疗失败率和不良事件,对患者进行了长达 48 个月的随访。对髁状突、躅状突和混合性病变的疗效进行了差异分析:结果:无论病变位置如何,支架组的疗效均明显优于SSoC组,24个月和48个月时的KOOS总评分均明显高于SSoC组(P均≤0.0009)和(P均≤0.02)。KOOS分量表和IKDC评分也观察到类似的结果。就 KOOS 回复率而言,植入组在 24、36 和 48 个月时表现更优(所有 p 均≤0.004)。在所有部位的磁共振成像中,均观察到植入组的缺损填充率更高。在髁状突和混合性病变中,种植体的治疗失败率较低:无论缺损位置如何,文石基支架都是安全有效的,与SSoC相比,文石基支架的临床和放射学效果更好,随访时间长达四年:I - 随机对照试验
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Orthopaedics
International Orthopaedics 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
360
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: International Orthopaedics, the Official Journal of the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT) , publishes original papers from all over the world. The articles deal with clinical orthopaedic surgery or basic research directly connected with orthopaedic surgery. International Orthopaedics will also link all the members of SICOT by means of an insert that will be concerned with SICOT matters. Finally, it is expected that news and information regarding all aspects of orthopaedic surgery, including meetings, panels, instructional courses, etc. will be brought to the attention of the readers. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the "Principles of laboratory animal care" (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals) where applicable. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfil the above-mentioned requirements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信