Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30659314›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020

Microfracture for cartilage repair in the knee: a systematic review of the contemporary literature.

Patrick Orth, Liang Gao, Henning Madry

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Delayed Lubricin Injection Improves Cartilage Repair Tissue Quality in an In Vivo Rabbit Osteochondral Defect Model.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Patrick OrthCenter of Experimental Orthopaedics, Saarland University, Kirrberger Strasse 100, Building 37, 66421, Homburg, Germany.
Liang GaoCenter of Experimental Orthopaedics, Saarland University, Kirrberger Strasse 100, Building 37, 66421, Homburg, Germany.
Henning MadryCenter of Experimental Orthopaedics, Saarland University, Kirrberger Strasse 100, Building 37, 66421, Homburg, Germany. henning.madry@uks.eu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo systematically review and evaluate novel clinical data following microfracture treatment of knee articular cartilage defects.

methodsA systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases for clinical trials on microfracture treatment, published between 2013 and 2018. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed, and data concerning patient demographics, study design, pre-, intra-, and postoperative findings were extracted. PRISMA guidelines were applied. The methodological quality of the included studies was analyzed by the modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS), and aggregate data were generated.

resultsEighteen studies including 1830 defects (1759 patients) were included. Of them, 8 (59% of patients) were cohort studies without a comparison group. Overall study quality was moderate (mean total CMS: 64 points), mainly due to low patient numbers, short follow-up periods, lack of control groups and structural repair tissue evaluation, and inhomogeneity in outcome parameters. Microfracture treatment of full-thickness articular cartilage defects (3.4 ± 2.1 cm

conclusionsMicrofracture provides good function and pain relief at the mid-term and clinically largely satisfying results thereafter. Standardized, high-quality future study designs will better refine optimal indications for microfracture in the context of cartilage repair strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: This systematic review is based on studies with levels of evidence ranging between I and IV (see results section and Table). Therefore, and according to this journals Instructions for Authors (SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND META-ANALYSES are assigned a level of evidence equivalent to the lowest level of evidence used from the manuscripts analysed), level of evidence is IV.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, SubchondralCartilage, ArticularHumansKnee JointSecond-Look SurgeryTreatment OutcomeWound HealingArticular cartilageMarrow stimulationMicrofractureSubchondral bone

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.