Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31422674›Full record

ArticleCartilage2021

The MOCART (Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue) 2.0 Knee Score and Atlas.

Markus M Schreiner, Marcus Raudner, Stefan Marlovits, Klaus Bohndorf, Michael Weber, Martin Zalaudek, Sebastian Röhrich, Pavol Szomolanyi, Giuseppe Filardo, Reinhard Windhager and 1 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cartilage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 101 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT05560477 phase1 / phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blinded, Multi-Center, Phase 1/2b Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of AM3101 to Augment Meniscal Healing

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CincinnatiRan2023 to 2027Enrolled74ConditionsMeniscus TearArmsAM3101, Saline Placebo
NCT07641868 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Management of Focal Cartilage Lesions of the Knee: The Benefits of an Autograft Procedure

TypeinterventionalSponsorLouis Pasteur Santé LorraineRan2026 to 2030Enrolled80ConditionsFocal Cartilage Lesions of the KneeArmsManagement of focal cartilage lesions of the knee: micro-fracture, Minced Cartilage Implantation (MCI)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Reliability of the MOCART score: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Recombinant Human Amelogenin Protein Enhances Healing of Osteochondral Injury in a Goat Model.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors.

Markus M SchreinerDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Marcus RaudnerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7575-0090
Stefan MarlovitsDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Klaus BohndorfDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital Halle, Halle, Germany.
Michael WeberDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Martin ZalaudekDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Sebastian RöhrichDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Pavol SzomolanyiDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Giuseppe FilardoApplied and Translational Research Center, IRCCS Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna University, Bologna, Italy.
Reinhard WindhagerDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Siegfried TrattnigDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSince the first introduction of the MOCART (Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue) score, significant progress has been made with regard to surgical treatment options for cartilage defects, as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of such defects. Thus, the aim of this study was to introduce the MOCART 2.0 knee score - an incremental update on the original MOCART score - that incorporates this progression. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe volume of cartilage defect filling is now assessed in 25% increments, with hypertrophic filling of up to 150% receiving the same scoring as complete repair. Integration now assesses only the integration to neighboring native cartilage, and the severity of surface irregularities is assessed in reference to cartilage repair length rather than depth. The signal intensity of the repair tissue differentiates normal signal, minor abnormal, or severely abnormal signal alterations. The assessment of the variables "subchondral lamina," "adhesions," and "synovitis" was removed and the points were reallocated to the new variable "bony defect or bony overgrowth." The variable "subchondral bone" was renamed to "subchondral changes" and assesses minor and severe edema-like marrow signal, as well as subchondral cysts or osteonecrosis-like signal. Overall, a MOCART 2.0 knee score ranging from 0 to 100 points may be reached. Four independent readers (two expert readers and two radiology residents with limited experience) assessed the 3 T MRI examinations of 24 patients, who had undergone cartilage repair of a femoral cartilage defect using the new MOCART 2.0 knee score. One of the expert readers and both inexperienced readers performed two readings, separated by a four-week interval. For the inexperienced readers, the first reading was based on the evaluation sheet only. For the second reading, a newly introduced atlas was used as an additional reference. Intrarater and interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and weighted kappa statistics. ICCs were interpreted according to Koo and Li; weighted kappa statistics were interpreted according to the criteria of Landis and Koch.

resultsThe overall intrarater (ICC = 0.88,

conclusionsThe MOCART 2.0 knee score was updated to account for changes in the past decade and demonstrates almost perfect interrater and intrarater reliability in expert readers. In inexperienced readers, use of the atlas may improve interrater reliability and, thus, increase the comparability of results across studies.

Indexed as

Cartilage, ArticularHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyReproducibility of ResultsTransplantation, Autologouscartilage repairmagnetic resonance imagingMOCART scorescoring system

Identifiers

PMID31422674
PMCPMC8725373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.