错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Differential analysis of the impact of lesions’ location on clinical and radiological outcomes after the implantation of a novel aragonite-based scaffold to treat knee cartilage defects

  • Pietro Conte,
  • Giuseppe Anzillotti,
  • Dennis C. Crawford,
  • Vinod Dasa,
  • David C. Flanigan,
  • William E. Nordt,
  • Jason M. Scopp,
  • Robert J. Meislin,
  • Eric J. Strauss,
  • Sabrina M. Strickland,
  • Gennaro Fiorentino,
  • Christian Lattermann

摘要

Purpose

There is limited comparative evidence on patient outcomes following cartilage repair in various knee compartments. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and imaging outcomes after treating cartilage defects in femoral condyles and trochlea with either an aragonite-based scaffold or surgical standard of care (SSoC, i.e., debridement/microfractures) in a large multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Methods

247 patients with up to three knee joint surface lesions (ICRS grade IIIa or above) in the femoral condyles, trochlea or both (“mixed”), were enrolled and randomized to surgery with either a cell-free aragonite scaffold or SSoC. Patients were followed for up to 48 months by analysing subjective scores (KOOS and IKDC), radiological outcomes (defect filling on MRI), as well as treatment failure rates and adverse events. A differential analysis of outcomes for condylar, trochlear and mixed lesions was performed.

Results

The scaffold group significantly outperformed the SSoC group regardless of lesion location with statistically significantly better KOOS Overall scores at 24 months (all p ≤ 0.0009) and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.02). Similar results were observed for KOOS subscales and IKDC scores. For KOOS responder rates, superiority of the implant group was demonstrated at 24, 36, and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.004). Higher defect filling on MRI for implants was observed for all locations. Lower treatment failure rates for the implant were observed in condylar and mixed lesions.

Conclusion

The aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective regardless of the defect location, providing superior clinical and radiological outcomes compared to SSoC up to four years follow-up.

Level of evidence

I – Randomized controlled trial.