No Difference in Chondrocyte Viability Using Manual Versus Custom-Cutting Technique for Matrix-Induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-06 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241308855
Wen-Teh Chang, Ran Atzmon, Monica S Vel, Kenneth M Lin, Geoffrey D Abrams, Seth L Sherman
{"title":"No Difference in Chondrocyte Viability Using Manual Versus Custom-Cutting Technique for Matrix-Induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation.","authors":"Wen-Teh Chang, Ran Atzmon, Monica S Vel, Kenneth M Lin, Geoffrey D Abrams, Seth L Sherman","doi":"10.1177/23259671241308855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) was developed for knee cartilage restoration involving seeding autologous chondrocytes onto a collagen membrane. Maintaining chondrocyte viability and achieving proper membrane size and contour are crucial for successful outcomes. Scissor cutting (Sc) has traditionally been used to shape the membrane, but recently, custom cutting (CC) have gained popularity for their enhanced preparation efficiency.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the difference in chondrocyte viability using the Sc versus CC methods.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Controlled laboratory study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using Sc and CC methods, 15 mm-diameter circular specimens were cut from 5 residual membranes. Membranes were stained, and confocal microscopy was used to visualize live/dead cells. Three zones were defined: the impact zone (the outermost zone at the cut edge), the central zone (the least manipulated zone), and the adjacent zone (the intermediate zone between the central and impact zones). For each circular specimen, the following measurements were recorded: the dimension of the impact zone, cell viability (percentage of live cells among total) for each zone, and the total number of cells within each zone (as cell density ×10<sup>5</sup>/cm<sup>2</sup>).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The width of the impact zone (mean ± standard error) was 355 ± 31 μm and 342 ± 24 μm for CC and Sc, respectively, and the impact zone occupied approximately 10% of the specimen. With both cutting techniques, cell viability was significantly lower in the impact zone (mean ± standard error: CC, 36.42% ± 3.85%; Sc, 40.94% ± 2.85%) compared with the adjacent zone (CC, 77.69% ± 2.97%; Sc, 74.17% ± 2.8%). The cell density from all zones varied from 5.84 ± 0.26 to 6.49 ± 0.34 × 10<sup>5</sup>/cm<sup>2</sup>, with no significant difference in cell viability in the impact zones between the cutting methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both cutting techniques led to a significant reduction in cell viability in the impact zone compared with other zones of the MACI specimen. There was no significant difference in chondrocyte viability or cell density for membranes cut by Sc or CC.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This evaluation of the newly introduced CC method on the chondrocyte viability of the MACI membrane will enable surgeons to make a more informed decision regarding cutting techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"13 2","pages":"23259671241308855"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11808760/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241308855","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) was developed for knee cartilage restoration involving seeding autologous chondrocytes onto a collagen membrane. Maintaining chondrocyte viability and achieving proper membrane size and contour are crucial for successful outcomes. Scissor cutting (Sc) has traditionally been used to shape the membrane, but recently, custom cutting (CC) have gained popularity for their enhanced preparation efficiency.

Purpose: To determine the difference in chondrocyte viability using the Sc versus CC methods.

Study design: Controlled laboratory study.

Methods: Using Sc and CC methods, 15 mm-diameter circular specimens were cut from 5 residual membranes. Membranes were stained, and confocal microscopy was used to visualize live/dead cells. Three zones were defined: the impact zone (the outermost zone at the cut edge), the central zone (the least manipulated zone), and the adjacent zone (the intermediate zone between the central and impact zones). For each circular specimen, the following measurements were recorded: the dimension of the impact zone, cell viability (percentage of live cells among total) for each zone, and the total number of cells within each zone (as cell density ×105/cm2).

Results: The width of the impact zone (mean ± standard error) was 355 ± 31 μm and 342 ± 24 μm for CC and Sc, respectively, and the impact zone occupied approximately 10% of the specimen. With both cutting techniques, cell viability was significantly lower in the impact zone (mean ± standard error: CC, 36.42% ± 3.85%; Sc, 40.94% ± 2.85%) compared with the adjacent zone (CC, 77.69% ± 2.97%; Sc, 74.17% ± 2.8%). The cell density from all zones varied from 5.84 ± 0.26 to 6.49 ± 0.34 × 105/cm2, with no significant difference in cell viability in the impact zones between the cutting methods.

Conclusion: Both cutting techniques led to a significant reduction in cell viability in the impact zone compared with other zones of the MACI specimen. There was no significant difference in chondrocyte viability or cell density for membranes cut by Sc or CC.

Clinical relevance: This evaluation of the newly introduced CC method on the chondrocyte viability of the MACI membrane will enable surgeons to make a more informed decision regarding cutting techniques.

手工与定制切割技术在基质诱导的自体软骨细胞植入中的软骨细胞活力无差异。
背景:基质诱导的自体软骨细胞植入(MACI)是一种将自体软骨细胞植入胶原膜的膝关节软骨修复技术。维持软骨细胞活力和获得适当的膜大小和轮廓是成功的关键。传统上使用剪刀切割(Sc)来塑造膜,但最近,定制切割(CC)因其提高制备效率而受到欢迎。目的:用Sc法和CC法测定软骨细胞活力的差异。研究设计:实验室对照研究。方法:采用Sc法和CC法,从5个残膜上切下直径15 mm的圆形标本。膜染色,用共聚焦显微镜观察活/死细胞。定义了三个区域:冲击区(切割边缘的最外层区域),中心区(最少被操纵的区域)和邻近区(中心和冲击区之间的中间区域)。对于每个圆形标本,记录以下测量结果:冲击区的尺寸,每个区域的细胞活力(活细胞占总数的百分比)以及每个区域内的细胞总数(以细胞密度×105/cm2表示)。结果:CC和Sc的冲击区宽度(平均±标准误差)分别为355±31 μm和342±24 μm,冲击区约占试样的10%。两种切割技术均显著降低了冲击区的细胞活力(平均值±标准误差:CC, 36.42%±3.85%;Sc, 40.94%±2.85%)与邻区(CC, 77.69%±2.97%;Sc, 74.17%±2.8%)。各区域的细胞密度变化范围为5.84±0.26 ~ 6.49±0.34 × 105/cm2,不同切削方式影响区域的细胞活力无显著差异。结论:与MACI标本的其他区域相比,两种切割技术都导致冲击区细胞活力显著降低。Sc和CC切割膜的软骨细胞活力和细胞密度没有显著差异。临床意义:对新引入的CC方法对MACI膜软骨细胞活力的评估,将使外科医生在切割技术方面做出更明智的决定。
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
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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