Secondary matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation after failed cartilage repair shows superior results when combined with autologous bone grafting: Findings from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU).

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Johannes Weishorn, Philipp Niemeyer, Peter Angele, Gunther Spahn, Thomas Tischer, Tobias Renkawitz, Yannic Bangert
{"title":"Secondary matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation after failed cartilage repair shows superior results when combined with autologous bone grafting: Findings from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU).","authors":"Johannes Weishorn, Philipp Niemeyer, Peter Angele, Gunther Spahn, Thomas Tischer, Tobias Renkawitz, Yannic Bangert","doi":"10.1002/ksa.12467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate whether additive autologous bone grafting (ABG) improves clinical outcome and survival in revision matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation (M-ACI) after failed cartilage repair (CR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, registry-based, matched-pair analysis was performed to compare patient-reported outcomes and survival in secondary M-ACI with or without additional bone grafting for focal full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee and to compare it with those in primary M-ACI. Patients were matched for age, sex, body mass index, defect size and localization, and number of previous CRs. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was assessed over a follow-up period of 36 months. The patient acceptable symptomatic state, the clinical response rate and the survival of the subgroups were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 818 patients were matched. Revision M-ACI (n = 238) with concomitant bone grafting was associated with significantly higher PRO as measured by KOOS (80.8 ± 16.8 vs. 72.0 ± 17.5, p = 0.032) and higher CRR (81.4% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.018) at 36 months compared to patients with revision M-ACI alone. KOOS and KOOS improvement in these patients did not differ from those who underwent primary M-ACI (p = n.s.). The combination of M-ACI and ABG resulted in a significantly higher KOOS at 36 months than M-ACI alone, regardless of whether bone marrow stimulation (89.6 ± 12.5 vs. 68.1 ± 17.9, p = 0.003) or ACI (82.6 ± 17.0 vs. 72.8 ± 16.0, p = 0.021) was performed before. Additional bone grafting results in equivalent survival rates at 7 years in secondary compared to primary M-ACI (83% vs. 84%, p = n.s.).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regardless of the type of previous CR, additional bone grafting in secondary M-ACI improves the clinical outcome, response rate and survival at 36 months compared to M-ACI alone. Secondary M-ACI with ABG had comparable clinical response and survival rates to primary M-ACI. Therefore, subchondral bone should be treated even in cases of mild bone involvement in revision M-ACI.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":17880,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.12467","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether additive autologous bone grafting (ABG) improves clinical outcome and survival in revision matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation (M-ACI) after failed cartilage repair (CR).

Methods: A retrospective, registry-based, matched-pair analysis was performed to compare patient-reported outcomes and survival in secondary M-ACI with or without additional bone grafting for focal full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee and to compare it with those in primary M-ACI. Patients were matched for age, sex, body mass index, defect size and localization, and number of previous CRs. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was assessed over a follow-up period of 36 months. The patient acceptable symptomatic state, the clinical response rate and the survival of the subgroups were determined.

Results: A total of 818 patients were matched. Revision M-ACI (n = 238) with concomitant bone grafting was associated with significantly higher PRO as measured by KOOS (80.8 ± 16.8 vs. 72.0 ± 17.5, p = 0.032) and higher CRR (81.4% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.018) at 36 months compared to patients with revision M-ACI alone. KOOS and KOOS improvement in these patients did not differ from those who underwent primary M-ACI (p = n.s.). The combination of M-ACI and ABG resulted in a significantly higher KOOS at 36 months than M-ACI alone, regardless of whether bone marrow stimulation (89.6 ± 12.5 vs. 68.1 ± 17.9, p = 0.003) or ACI (82.6 ± 17.0 vs. 72.8 ± 16.0, p = 0.021) was performed before. Additional bone grafting results in equivalent survival rates at 7 years in secondary compared to primary M-ACI (83% vs. 84%, p = n.s.).

Conclusions: Regardless of the type of previous CR, additional bone grafting in secondary M-ACI improves the clinical outcome, response rate and survival at 36 months compared to M-ACI alone. Secondary M-ACI with ABG had comparable clinical response and survival rates to primary M-ACI. Therefore, subchondral bone should be treated even in cases of mild bone involvement in revision M-ACI.

Level of evidence: Level III.

软骨修复失败后的二次基质相关自体软骨细胞植入术与自体骨移植术联合使用效果更佳:德国软骨登记处(KnorpelRegister DGOU)的研究结果。
目的:本研究旨在评估添加自体骨移植(ABG)是否能改善软骨修复(CR)失败后翻修性基质相关自体软骨细胞植入术(M-ACI)的临床疗效和存活率:我们进行了一项基于登记的配对回顾性分析,比较膝关节局灶性全厚软骨缺损的二次M-ACI患者报告的疗效和存活率,并将其与初次M-ACI的疗效和存活率进行比较。患者的年龄、性别、体重指数、缺损大小和定位以及既往CR次数均匹配。在36个月的随访期间,对膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分(KOOS)进行了评估。确定了患者可接受的症状状态、临床反应率和亚组的存活率:结果:共有 818 名患者进行了配型。与单独接受 M-ACI 翻修术的患者相比,同时接受骨移植的 M-ACI 翻修术患者(n = 238)在 36 个月后的 KOOS(80.8 ± 16.8 vs. 72.0 ± 17.5,p = 0.032)和 CRR(81.4% vs. 52.0%,p = 0.018)显著高于 KOOS(80.8 ± 16.8 vs. 72.0 ± 17.5,p = 0.032)和 CRR(81.4% vs. 52.0%,p = 0.018)。这些患者的 KOOS 和 KOOS 改善情况与接受初治 M-ACI 的患者没有差异(p = n.s.)。无论之前是否进行了骨髓刺激(89.6 ± 12.5 vs. 68.1 ± 17.9,p = 0.003)或 ACI(82.6 ± 17.0 vs. 72.8 ± 16.0,p = 0.021),M-ACI 和 ABG 组合在 36 个月时的 KOOS 都明显高于单纯的 M-ACI。与初次M-ACI相比,二次骨移植可使患者7年存活率相同(83% vs. 84%,p = n.s.):结论:无论既往CR的类型如何,与单纯M-ACI相比,二次M-ACI的额外骨移植可改善临床结果、反应率和36个月的存活率。使用 ABG 的二次 M-ACI 的临床反应率和存活率与一次 M-ACI 相当。因此,即使在翻修M-ACI中出现轻度骨质受累的病例,也应治疗软骨下骨:证据等级:三级。
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
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
18.40%
发文量
418
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Few other areas of orthopedic surgery and traumatology have undergone such a dramatic evolution in the last 10 years as knee surgery, arthroscopy and sports traumatology. Ranked among the top 33% of journals in both Orthopedics and Sports Sciences, the goal of this European journal is to publish papers about innovative knee surgery, sports trauma surgery and arthroscopy. Each issue features a series of peer-reviewed articles that deal with diagnosis and management and with basic research. Each issue also contains at least one review article about an important clinical problem. Case presentations or short notes about technical innovations are also accepted for publication. The articles cover all aspects of knee surgery and all types of sports trauma; in addition, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention, and all types of arthroscopy (not only the knee but also the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, ankle, etc.) are addressed. Articles on new diagnostic techniques such as MRI and ultrasound and high-quality articles about the biomechanics of joints, muscles and tendons are included. Although this is largely a clinical journal, it is also open to basic research with clinical relevance. Because the journal is supported by a distinguished European Editorial Board, assisted by an international Advisory Board, you can be assured that the journal maintains the highest standards. Official Clinical Journal of the European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
×
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