RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Few randomized controlled trials with a midterm follow-up have compared matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) with microfracture (MFx) for knee cartilage lesions. PURPOSE: To compare the structural, clinical, and safety outcomes at midterm follow-up of MACT versus MFx for treating symptomatic knee cartilage lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 48 patients aged between 18 and 50 years, with 1- to 4-cm2 International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade III to IV knee chondral lesions, were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the MACT and MFx treatment groups. A sequential prospective evaluation was performed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) T2 mapping, the MOCART (magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue) score, second-look arthroscopic surgery, patient-reported outcome measures, the responder rate (based on achieving the minimal clinically important difference for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] pain and KOOS Sport/Recreation), adverse events, and treatment failure (defined as a reoperation because of symptoms caused by the primary defect and the detachment or absence of >50% of the repaired tissue during revision surgery). RESULTS: Overall, 35 patients (18 MACT and 17 MFx) with a mean chondral lesion size of 1.8 ± 0.8 cm2 (range, 1-4 cm2) were followed up to a mean of 6 years postoperatively (range, 4-9 years). MACT demonstrated significantly better structural outcomes than MFx at 1 to 6 years postoperatively. At final follow-up, the MRI T2 mapping values of the repaired tissue were 37.7 ± 8.5 ms for MACT versus 46.4 ± 8.5 ms for MFx (P = .003), while the MOCART scores were 59.4 ± 17.3 and 42.4 ± 16.3, respectively (P = .006). More than 50% defect filling was seen in 95% of patients at 2 years and 82% at 6 years in the MACT group and in 67% at 2 years and 53% at 6 years in the MFx group. The second-look ICRS scores at 1 year were 10.7 ± 1.3 for MACT and 9.0 ± 1.8 for MFx (P = .001). Both groups showed significant clinical improvements at 6 years postoperatively compared with their preoperative status. Significant differences favoring the MACT group were observed at 2 years on the KOOS Activities of Daily Living (P = .043), at 4 years on all KOOS subscales (except Symptoms; P < .05) and the Tegner scale (P = .008), and at 6 years on the Tegner scale (P = .010). The responder rates at 6 years were 53% and 77% for MFx and MACT, respectively. There were no reported treatment failures after MACT; the failure rate was 8.3% in the MFx group. Neither group had serious adverse events related to treatment. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent MACT had better structural outcomes than those who underwent MFx at 1 to 6 years postoperatively. Both groups of patients showed significant clinical improvements at final follow-up compared with their preoperative status. MACT showed superiority at 4 years for the majority of the KOOS subscales and for the Tegner scale at 4 to 6 years. The MACT group also had a higher responder rate and lower failure rate at final follow-up. REGISTRATION: NCT01947374 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).
Assuntos
Cartilagem Articular , Fraturas de Estresse , Atividades Cotidianas , Adolescente , Adulto , Cartilagem Articular/cirurgia , Condrócitos , Seguimentos , Humanos , Articulação do Joelho/cirurgia , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Transplante Autólogo , Adulto JovemRESUMO
La perforación del túnel femoral a través del portal anteromedial permite la colocación anatómica del túnel femoral, es indispensable en la reconstrucción con doble banda y en la técnica todo adentro. Existen varios retos y complicaciones cuando se toma la decisión de realizar esta técnica, los cuales deben ser conocidos por el cirujano antes de llevar a cabo este procedimiento. El propósito de esta revisión es describir los pasos a seguir para los cirujanos que contemplan realizar el túnel femoral a través del portal anteromedial para la reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior.
Assuntos
Humanos , Articulação do Joelho/cirurgia , Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirurgia , Procedimentos de Cirurgia Plástica/métodos , Tendões/transplante , Artroscopia/métodos , Fêmur/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-OperatóriasRESUMO
La perforación del túnel femoral a través del portal anteromedial permite la colocación anatómica del túnel femoral, es indispensable en la reconstrucción con doble banda y en la técnica todo adentro. Existen varios retos y complicaciones cuando se toma la decisión de realizar esta técnica, los cuales deben ser conocidos por el cirujano antes de llevar a cabo este procedimiento. El propósito de esta revisión es describir los pasos a seguir para los cirujanos que contemplan realizar el túnel femoral a través del portal anteromedial para la reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirurgia , Tendões/transplante , Procedimentos de Cirurgia Plástica/métodos , Articulação do Joelho/cirurgia , Fêmur/cirurgia , Artroscopia/métodos , Complicações Pós-OperatóriasRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the subjective and objective outcome of arthroscopic meniscal repair in patients with chronic meniscal lesions. METHODS: A group of patients that underwent arthroscopic meniscal repair of chronic tears with a minimum follow-up of six months was retrospectively evaluated. Physical examination oriented at finding persistent meniscal lesions was performed. IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were applied, and a control magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed. RESULTS: Twenty seven menisci in 25 patients were repaired. There were 21 male and 4 female patients with a mean age of 29.6 +/- 8.2 years (20-45). Mean time from lesion to surgery was 25.24 +/- 26 months (6-120). 27. There was significant improvement in all parameters evaluated in 21 patients. Four patients were found to have signs and symptoms of persistent meniscal tears. Abnormal increased signal intensity in the repaired menisci was observed by MRI in all patients, not correlating with clinical findings. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term success rate of 85% was obtained with arthroscopic repair of chronic meniscal lesions in this study, which supports the fact that a long period of time before surgery does not necessarily lead to failure. It is valid to perform a meniscal repair in patients with chronic tears as long as the proper surgical technique and an adequate rehabilitation protocol are used.
