Does Progress in Microfracture Techniques Necessarily Translate into Clinical Effectiveness?

Overview

Journal World J Orthop

Publisher Baishideng Publishing Group

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2024 Apr 10

PMID 38596189

Authors

Sathish Muthu

Vibhu Krishnan Viswanathan

Manoharan Sakthivel

Mohammed Thabrez

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Multitudinous advancements have been made to the traditional microfracture (MFx) technique, which have involved delivery of various acellular 2 generation MFx and cellular MFx-III components to the area of cartilage defect. The relative benefits and pitfalls of these diverse modifications of MFx technique are still not widely understood.

Aim: To comparatively analyze the functional, radiological, and histological outcomes, and complications of various generations of MFx available for the treatment of cartilage defects.

Methods: A systematic review was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus. Patients of any age and sex with cartilage defects undergoing any form of MFx were considered for analysis. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting functional, radiological, histological outcomes or complications of various generations of MFx for the management of cartilage defects. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted in Stata and Cochrane's Confidence in NMA approach was utilized for appraisal of evidence.

Results: Forty-four RCTs were included in the analysis with patients of mean age of 39.40 (± 9.46) years. Upon comparing the results of the other generations with MFX-I as a constant comparator, we noted a trend towards better pain control and functional outcome (KOOS, IKDC, and Cincinnati scores) at the end of 1-, 2-, and 5-year time points with MFx-III, although the differences were not statistically significant ( > 0.05). We also noted statistically significant Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue score in the higher generations of microfracture (weighted mean difference: 17.44, 95% confidence interval: 0.72, 34.16, = 0.025; without significant heterogeneity) at 1 year. However, the difference was not maintained at 2 years. There was a trend towards better defect filling on MRI with the second and third generation MFx, although the difference was not statistically significant ( > 0.05).

Conclusion: The higher generations of traditional MFx technique utilizing acellular and cellular components to augment its potential in the management of cartilage defects has shown only marginal improvement in the clinical and radiological outcomes.

References

Saris D, Vanlauwe J, Victor J, Almqvist K, Verdonk R, Bellemans J . Treatment of symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee: characterized chondrocyte implantation results in better clinical outcome at 36 months in a randomized trial compared to microfracture. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37 Suppl 1:10S-19S. DOI: 10.1177/0363546509350694. View

Stanish W, McCormack R, Forriol F, Mohtadi N, Pelet S, Desnoyers J . Novel scaffold-based BST-CarGel treatment results in superior cartilage repair compared with microfracture in a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95(18):1640-50. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01345. View

Gudas R, Kalesinskas R, Kimtys V, Stankevicius E, Toliusis V, Bernotavicius G . A prospective randomized clinical study of mosaic osteochondral autologous transplantation versus microfracture for the treatment of osteochondral defects in the knee joint in young athletes. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21(9):1066-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.06.018. View

Steadman J, Rodkey W, Rodrigo J . Microfracture: surgical technique and rehabilitation to treat chondral defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001; (391 Suppl):S362-9. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200110001-00033. View

Koh Y, Kwon O, Kim Y, Choi Y, Tak D . Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells With Microfracture Versus Microfracture Alone: 2-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial. Arthroscopy. 2015; 32(1):97-109. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.09.010. View

Krych A, Nawabi D, Farshad-Amacker N, Jones K, Maak T, Potter H . Bone Marrow Concentrate Improves Early Cartilage Phase Maturation of a Scaffold Plug in the Knee: A Comparative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis to Platelet-Rich Plasma and Control. Am J Sports Med. 2015; 44(1):91-8. DOI: 10.1177/0363546515609597. View

Martincic D, Leban J, Filardo G, Busacca M, Barlic A, Veber M . Autologous chondrocytes versus filtered bone marrow mesenchymal stem/stromal cells for knee cartilage repair-a prospective study. Int Orthop. 2020; 45(4):931-939. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-020-04727-2. View

Farr J, Cole B, Dhawan A, Kercher J, Sherman S . Clinical cartilage restoration: evolution and overview. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(10):2696-705. PMC: 3171560. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1764-z. View

Brittberg M, Lindahl A, Nilsson A, Ohlsson C, Isaksson O, Peterson L . Treatment of deep cartilage defects in the knee with autologous chondrocyte transplantation. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331(14):889-95. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199410063311401. View

10.

Curl W, Krome J, Gordon E, Rushing J, Smith B, Poehling G . Cartilage injuries: a review of 31,516 knee arthroscopies. Arthroscopy. 1997; 13(4):456-60. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-8063(97)90124-9. View

11.

Case J, M Scopp J . Treatment of Articular Cartilage Defects of the Knee With Microfracture and Enhanced Microfracture Techniques. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2016; 24(2):63-8. DOI: 10.1097/JSA.0000000000000113. View

12.

Everhart J, Campbell A, Abouljoud M, Kirven J, Flanigan D . Cost-efficacy of Knee Cartilage Defect Treatments in the United States. Am J Sports Med. 2019; 48(1):242-251. DOI: 10.1177/0363546519834557. View

13.

Saw K, Anz A, Jee C, Merican S, Ng R, Roohi S . Articular cartilage regeneration with autologous peripheral blood stem cells versus hyaluronic acid: a randomized controlled trial. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29(4):684-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.12.008. View

14.

Buckwalter J . Articular cartilage: injuries and potential for healing. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998; 28(4):192-202. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.4.192. View

15.

Hjelle K, Solheim E, Strand T, Muri R, Brittberg M . Articular cartilage defects in 1,000 knee arthroscopies. Arthroscopy. 2002; 18(7):730-4. DOI: 10.1053/jars.2002.32839. View

16.

Knutsen G, Drogset J, Engebretsen L, Grontvedt T, Ludvigsen T, Loken S . A Randomized Multicenter Trial Comparing Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation with Microfracture: Long-Term Follow-up at 14 to 15 Years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98(16):1332-9. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.15.01208. View

17.

Lim H, Park Y, Ha C, Cole B, Lee B, Jeong H . Allogeneic Umbilical Cord Blood-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Implantation Versus Microfracture for Large, Full-Thickness Cartilage Defects in Older Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial and Extended 5-Year Clinical Follow-up. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021; 9(1):2325967120973052. PMC: 7809531. DOI: 10.1177/2325967120973052. View

18.

Siclari A, Mascaro G, Gentili C, Kaps C, Cancedda R, Boux E . Cartilage repair in the knee with subchondral drilling augmented with a platelet-rich plasma-immersed polymer-based implant. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013; 22(6):1225-34. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2484-1. View

19.

Qiao Z, Tang J, Yue B, Wang J, Zhang J, Xuan L . Human adipose-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells plus microfracture and hyaluronic acid for cartilage repair: a Phase IIa trial. Regen Med. 2020; 15(1):1193-1214. DOI: 10.2217/rme-2019-0068. View

20.

Yoon K, Park J, Lee J, Lee E, Lee J, Kim S . Costal Chondrocyte-Derived Pellet-Type Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation for Treatment of Articular Cartilage Defect. Am J Sports Med. 2020; 48(5):1236-1245. DOI: 10.1177/0363546520905565. View