Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29728409›Full record

SynthesisDisease models & mechanisms2018

Subchondral drilling for articular cartilage repair: a systematic review of translational research.

Liang Gao, Lars K H Goebel, Patrick Orth, Magali Cucchiarini, Henning Madry

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Disease models & mechanisms, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. The treatment of knee cartilage lesions: state of the art.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liang GaoCenter of Experimental Orthopedics, Saarland University, D-66421 Homburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1438-9670
Lars K H GoebelCenter of Experimental Orthopedics, Saarland University, D-66421 Homburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9907-264X
Patrick OrthCenter of Experimental Orthopedics, Saarland University, D-66421 Homburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0632-4247
Magali CucchiariniCenter of Experimental Orthopedics, Saarland University, D-66421 Homburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0323-8922
Henning MadryCenter of Experimental Orthopedics, Saarland University, D-66421 Homburg, Germany henning.madry@uks.eu.ORCID 0000-0002-8612-4842
Saarland University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Articular cartilage defects may initiate osteoarthritis. Subchondral drilling, a widely applied clinical technique to treat small cartilage defects, does not yield cartilage regeneration. Various translational studies aiming to improve the outcome of drilling have been performed; however, a robust systematic analysis of its translational evidence was still lacking. Here, we performed a systematic review of the outcome of subchondral drilling for knee cartilage repair in translational animal models. A total of 12 relevant publications studying 198 animals was identified, detailed study characteristics were extracted, and methodological quality and risk of bias were analyzed. Subchondral drilling led to improved repair outcome compared with defects that were untreated or treated with abrasion arthroplasty for cartilage repair in multiple translational models. Within the 12 studies, considerable subchondral bone changes were observed, including subchondral bone cysts and intralesional osteophytes. Furthermore, extensive alterations of the subchondral bone microarchitecture appeared in a temporal pattern in small and large animal models, together with specific topographic aspects of repair. Moreover, variable technical aspects directly affected the outcomes of osteochondral repair. The data from this systematic review indicate that subchondral drilling yields improved short-term structural articular cartilage repair compared with spontaneous repair in multiple small and large animal models. These results have important implications for future investigations aimed at an enhanced translation into clinical settings for the treatment of cartilage defects, highlighting the importance of considering specific aspects of modifiable variables such as improvements in the design and reporting of preclinical studies, together with the need to better understand the underlying mechanisms of cartilage repair following subchondral drilling.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, SubchondralRegenerationTranslational Research, BiomedicalAnimalsCartilage, ArticularPublication BiasResearch ReportRisk FactorsAnimal modelArticular cartilage repairSubchondral drillingSystematic reviewTranslational research

Identifiers

PMID29728409
PMCPMC6031351
OpenAlexW2799862622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.