Autologous Osteoperiosteal Transplantation Versus Autologous Osteochondral Transplantation for Large Cystic Osteochondral Lesions of the Medial Talus: 2-Year Results From a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 4.5 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
American Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-19 DOI:10.1177/03635465251361505
Shuai Yang, Fengyi Hu, Qirui Shao, Zengkang Zhang, Xuebin Liu, Yanfang Jiang, Dong Jiang, Xing Xie, Chen Jiao, Yuelin Hu, Weili Shi, Qinwei Guo
{"title":"Autologous Osteoperiosteal Transplantation Versus Autologous Osteochondral Transplantation for Large Cystic Osteochondral Lesions of the Medial Talus: 2-Year Results From a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Shuai Yang, Fengyi Hu, Qirui Shao, Zengkang Zhang, Xuebin Liu, Yanfang Jiang, Dong Jiang, Xing Xie, Chen Jiao, Yuelin Hu, Weili Shi, Qinwei Guo","doi":"10.1177/03635465251361505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Both autologous osteochondral transplantation (AOCT) and autologous osteoperiosteal transplantation (AOPT) are available for large cystic osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLTs). However, there is a lack of valid prospective evidence directly comparing the efficacy between AOPT and AOCT.</p><p><strong>Purpose/hypothesis: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of AOPT versus AOCT in patients with large cystic OLTs (>8 mm in cystic diameter) at 2 years of follow-up. It was hypothesized that compared with AOCT, AOPT would be associated with noninferior efficacy and less donor site morbidity in the treatment of large cystic OLTs.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective randomized controlled trial of 70 consecutive patients who underwent AOPT or AOCT between May 2018 and July 2022. Perioperatively, patient characteristics, clinical data, and surgical records were collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, including the visual analog scale for pain (VAS), the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, and the ankle activity score (AAS), at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Radiological outcomes were evaluated according to the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) score. The arthroscopic examination was performed using the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) score. Donor site morbidity in both groups was recorded over the 24-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 67 patients completed 2-year follow-up: 33 in the AOPT group and 34 in the AOCT group. Baseline characteristics were comparable. No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of the VAS, AOFAS, and AAS scores throughout the 2-year follow-up period. The AOCT group exhibited higher MOCART and ICRS scores within the first 12 months after surgery. However, by 24-month follow-up, the MOCART score in the AOPT group had reached a level comparable with that in the AOCT group. Additionally, the AOPT group had a lower incidence of donor site morbidity and lower VAS scores across the follow-up period compared with the AOCT group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This trial demonstrated that at 2-year follow-up, AOPT was noninferior to AOCT with regard to clinical outcomes and cartilage repair quality in patients with large cystic OLTs. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these results.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>NCT03347877 (ClinicalTrials.gov).</p>","PeriodicalId":55528,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2642-2651"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465251361505","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Both autologous osteochondral transplantation (AOCT) and autologous osteoperiosteal transplantation (AOPT) are available for large cystic osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLTs). However, there is a lack of valid prospective evidence directly comparing the efficacy between AOPT and AOCT.

Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of AOPT versus AOCT in patients with large cystic OLTs (>8 mm in cystic diameter) at 2 years of follow-up. It was hypothesized that compared with AOCT, AOPT would be associated with noninferior efficacy and less donor site morbidity in the treatment of large cystic OLTs.

Study design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial of 70 consecutive patients who underwent AOPT or AOCT between May 2018 and July 2022. Perioperatively, patient characteristics, clinical data, and surgical records were collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, including the visual analog scale for pain (VAS), the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, and the ankle activity score (AAS), at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Radiological outcomes were evaluated according to the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) score. The arthroscopic examination was performed using the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) score. Donor site morbidity in both groups was recorded over the 24-month follow-up period.

Results: A total of 67 patients completed 2-year follow-up: 33 in the AOPT group and 34 in the AOCT group. Baseline characteristics were comparable. No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of the VAS, AOFAS, and AAS scores throughout the 2-year follow-up period. The AOCT group exhibited higher MOCART and ICRS scores within the first 12 months after surgery. However, by 24-month follow-up, the MOCART score in the AOPT group had reached a level comparable with that in the AOCT group. Additionally, the AOPT group had a lower incidence of donor site morbidity and lower VAS scores across the follow-up period compared with the AOCT group.

Conclusion: This trial demonstrated that at 2-year follow-up, AOPT was noninferior to AOCT with regard to clinical outcomes and cartilage repair quality in patients with large cystic OLTs. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these results.

Registration: NCT03347877 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

自体骨骨膜移植与自体骨软骨移植治疗距骨内侧大囊性骨软骨病变:一项前瞻性随机对照试验的2年结果
背景:自体骨软骨移植(AOCT)和自体骨骨膜移植(AOPT)均可用于距骨大囊性骨软骨病变(OLTs)。然而,目前缺乏有效的前瞻性证据直接比较AOPT和AOCT的疗效。目的/假设:本研究的目的是比较AOPT与AOCT在2年随访中治疗大囊性olt(囊直径约8mm)患者的疗效和安全性。我们假设,与AOCT相比,AOPT在治疗大囊性olt时具有良好的疗效和更少的供区发病率。研究设计:随机对照试验;证据等级2。方法:这是一项前瞻性随机对照试验,纳入了2018年5月至2022年7月期间连续接受AOPT或AOCT治疗的70例患者。收集围手术期患者特征、临床资料及手术记录。临床结果采用患者报告的结果测量方法进行评估,包括术后3、6、12和24个月的疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)、美国矫形足踝协会(AOFAS)踝关节-后足评分和踝关节活动评分(AAS)。根据磁共振观察软骨修复组织(MOCART)评分评估放射学结果。采用国际软骨修复协会(ICRS)评分进行关节镜检查。在24个月的随访期间记录两组的供体部位发病率。结果:共有67例患者完成了2年随访:AOPT组33例,AOCT组34例。基线特征具有可比性。2年随访期间,两组患者的VAS、AOFAS、AAS评分均无显著差异。AOCT组术后12个月内MOCART和ICRS评分较高。然而,经过24个月的随访,AOPT组的MOCART评分已达到与AOCT组相当的水平。此外,与AOCT组相比,AOPT组在整个随访期间供体部位发病率和VAS评分均较低。结论:该试验表明,在2年的随访中,对于大囊性olt患者,AOPT在临床结果和软骨修复质量方面不逊于AOCT。需要长期随访来证实这些结果。注册:NCT03347877 (ClinicalTrials.gov)。
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
9.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
425
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: An invaluable resource for the orthopaedic sports medicine community, _The American Journal of Sports Medicine_ is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, first published in 1972. It is the official publication of the [American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM)](http://www.sportsmed.org/)! The journal acts as an important forum for independent orthopaedic sports medicine research and education, allowing clinical practitioners the ability to make decisions based on sound scientific information. This journal is a must-read for: * Orthopaedic Surgeons and Specialists * Sports Medicine Physicians * Physiatrists * Athletic Trainers * Team Physicians * And Physical Therapists
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信