-
- Guilherme C Gracitelli, Gokhan Meric, Dustin T Briggs, Pamela A Pulido, Julie C McCauley, João Carlos Belloti, and William D Bugbee.
- Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California, USA Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
- Am J Sports Med. 2015 Apr 1; 43 (4): 885-91.
BackgroundIn most treatment algorithms, osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation is regarded as an alternative salvage procedure when other, previous reparative treatments have failed.PurposeTo compare the outcomes of a retrospective matched-pair cohort of (1) primary OCA transplantation and (2) OCA transplantation after failure of previous subchondral marrow stimulation.Study DesignCohort study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsAn OCA database was used to identify 46 knees that had OCA transplantation performed as a primary treatment (group 1) and 46 knees that underwent OCA transplantation after failure of previous subchondral marrow stimulation (group 2). All patients had a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Patients in each group were matched for age (±5 years), diagnosis (osteochondral lesion, degenerative chondral lesion, traumatic chondral injury), and graft size (small, <5 cm2; medium, 5-10 cm2; large, >10 cm2). The groups had similar body mass indexes, sex distributions, and graft locations (femoral condyle, patella, and trochlea. The number and type of further surgeries after the OCA transplantation were assessed; failure was defined as any reoperation resulting in removal of the graft. Functional outcomes were evaluated by use of the modified Merle d'Aubigné-Postel (18-point) scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), and the Knee Society function (KS-F) scale. Patient satisfaction, according to a 5-point scale from "extremely satisfied" to "dissatisfied," was recorded at the latest follow-up.ResultsEleven of 46 knees (24%) in group 1 had reoperations, compared with 20 of 46 knees (44%) in group 2 (P = .04). The OCA was classified as a failure in 5 knees (11%) in group 1 and 7 knees (15%) in group 2 (P = .53). At 10 years of follow-up, survivorship of the graft was 87.4% and 86% in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Both groups showed improvement in pain and function on all subjective scores from preoperatively to the latest follow-up (all P < .001). Results showed that 87% of patients in group 1 and 97% in group 2 were "satisfied" or "extremely satisfied" with the OCA transplantation.ConclusionFavorable results were shown in both groups with significant improvement of functional scores and excellent survivorship. Despite the higher reoperation rate in the previously treated group, previous subchondral marrow stimulation did not adversely affect the survivorship and functional outcome of OCA transplantation.© 2015 The Author(s).
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.