Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2014
Cartilage extra-cellular matrix biomembrane for the enhancement of microfractured defects.
Trial report in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic factors for the management of chondral defects of the knee and ankle joint: a systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Pooled it
- Surgical strategies for chondral defects of the patellofemoral joint: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Pooled it
- Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis is effective for focal chondral defects of the knee.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (mACI) versus autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) for chondral defects of the knee: a systematic review.British medical bulletin · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Enhanced microfracture using acellular scaffolds improves results after treatment of symptomatic focal grade III/IV knee cartilage lesions but current clinical evidence does not allow unequivocal recommendation.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2020Pooled it
- Can Biologic Augmentation Improve Clinical Outcomes Following Microfracture for Symptomatic Cartilage Defects of the Knee? A Systematic Review.Cartilage · 2018Pooled it
- Does progress in microfracture techniques necessarily translate into clinical effectiveness?World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- Effects of Modified Glucosamine on the Chondrogenic Potential of Circulating Stem Cells under Experimental Inflammation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Fibrin glue does not promote migration and proliferation of bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells in collagenic membranes: an in vitro study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Surgical management of focal chondral defects of the knee: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Review
- Endogenous Repair and Regeneration of Injured Articular Cartilage: A Challenging but Promising Therapeutic Strategy.Aging and disease · 2021Review
- Autologous Matrix Induced Chondrogenesis (AMIC) Compared to Microfractures for Chondral Defects of the Talar Shoulder: A Five-Year Follow-Up Prospective Cohort Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Autologous Matrix-Induced Chondrogenesis (AMIC) and Microfractures for Focal Chondral Defects of the Knee: A Medium-Term Comparative Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Management of Patellar Chondral Defects with Autologous Matrix Induced Chondrogenesis (AMIC) Compared to Microfractures: A Four Years Follow-Up Clinical Trial.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Clinical and Radiological Outcomes After Autologous Matrix-Induced Chondrogenesis Versus Microfracture of the Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2020Review
- Microfracture: State of the Art in Cartilage Surgery?Cartilage · 2018Review
- Knee cartilage defect: marrow stimulating techniques.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2015Article
- Updates in biological therapies for knee injuries: full thickness cartilage defect.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2014Article
- Tailored PVA/ECM scaffolds for cartilage regeneration.BioMed research international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of the study was to evaluate whether the biomembrane made of cartilage extracellular matrix, designed to provide cartilage-like favourable environments as well as to prevent against washout of blood clot after microfracture, would enhance cartilage repair compared with the conventional microfracture technique.
methodsA prospective trial was designed to compare the biomembrane cover after microfracture with conventional microfracture among patients with grade III-IV symptomatic cartilage defect in the knee joint. Patients aged 18-60 years were assigned to either the microfracture/biomembrane (n = 45) or microfracture groups (n = 19). Among them, 24 knees in the microfracture/biomembrane and 12 knees in the microfracture were followed up for 2 years. Cartilage repair was assessed with magnetic resonance imagings taken 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively, and the clinical outcomes were also recorded.
resultsCompared with conventional microfracture, microfracture/biomembrane resulted in greater degree of cartilage repair (p = 0.043). In the intra-group analysis, while microfracture showed moderate to good degree of cartilage repair in nearly 50 % of the patients (47 % at 6 months to 50% at 2 years; n.s.), microfracture/biomembrane maintained an equivalent degree of repair up to 2 years (88% at 6 months to 75% at 2 years; n.s.). The clinical outcome at 2 years also showed improved knee score and satisfaction and decreased pain in each group, but the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant.
conclusionsCompared with conventional microfracture, biomembrane cover after microfracture yielded superior outcome in terms of the degree of cartilage repair during 2 years of follow-up. This implies that initial protection of blood clot and immature repair tissue at the microfractured defect is important for the promotion of enhanced cartilage repair, which may be obtained by the application of a biomembrane. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective comparative study, Level II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.