Open AccessMicrofracture technique versus osteochondral autologous transplantation mosaicplasty in patients with articular chondral lesions of the knee: a prospective randomized trial with long‐term follow‐up
Author(s) -
Ulstein Svend,
Årøen Asbjørn,
Røtterud Jan Harald,
Løken Sverre,
Engebretsen Lars,
Heir Stig
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.806
H-Index - 125
eISSN - 1433-7347
pISSN - 0942-2056
DOI - 10.1007/s00167-014-2843-6
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , osteoarthritis , transplantation , radiological weapon , hamstring , randomized controlled trial , radiography , confidence interval , pathology , alternative medicine
Purpose To compare long‐term functional and radiological outcome following microfracture technique (MF) versus osteochondral autologous transplantation (OAT) mosaicplasty for treating focal chondral lesions of the knee. Methods Twenty‐five patients (mean age 32.3 years, SD 7.7) with a full‐thickness (International Cartilage Repair Society grade 3 or 4) chondral lesion of the articulating surface of the femur were randomized to either MF ( n = 11) or OAT mosaicplasty ( n = 14). At a median follow‐up of 9.8 years (range 4.9–11.4), the patients were evaluated using Lysholm score ( n = 25), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS, n = 25), isokinetic quadriceps measurement and hamstring strength measurement ( n = 22) and standing radiographs ( n = 23). Results There were no significant differences in Lysholm score, KOOS, isokinetic muscle strength or radiographic osteoarthritis between MF‐treated patients and OAT mosaicplasty‐treated patients at follow‐up. Mean Lysholm score at follow‐up was 69.7 [95 % confidence interval (CI), 55.1–84.4] for the MF group and 62.6 (95 % CI, 52.6–72.6) for the OAT mosaicplasty group. Conclusion At long‐term follow‐up, there were no significant differences between patients treated with MF and patients treated with OAT mosaicplasty in patient‐reported outcomes, muscle strength or radiological outcome. Level of evidence Therapeutic study, Level II.