ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2019
Cartilage Restoration in the Adolescent Knee: a Systematic Review.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regenerative Variability of Human Juvenile Chondrocyte Sheets From Different Cell Donors in an Athymic Rat Knee Chondral Defect Model.Cartilage · 2024Article
- Reconstruction of Large Osteochondral Lesions in the Knee: Focus on Fixation Techniques.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation for Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Medial Femoral Condyle.Video journal of sports medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this systematic review was to assess the outcomes and complications of described cartilage restoration techniques for cartilage defects (grades I to IV) in the adolescent knee. RECENT
findingsEleven studies satisfied the inclusion criteria comprising 307 patients with a mean follow-up of 4.6 years (range 1-18.9 years). Study patients were treated with autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) (n = 98, mean age 16.0), microfracture (MFx) (n = 36, mean age 15.4), internal fixation (n = 71, mean age 13.1), osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation (n = 78, mean age 16.4), and cartillage and excision (n = 24; mean age 14.2). ACI, MFx, OCA transplantation, and internal fixation showed significant improvement in knee functionality scores. The overall complication rate was 10.6% (n = 31). OCA transplantation had the highest complication rate (26.9%; n = 21/78). In summary, our review shows that ACI was the most commonly used technique. Furthermore, ACI, MFx, OCA transplantation, and internal fixation show the most promise in treating the adolescent population due to positive postoperative functional outcomes and low complication rates. However, future studies with large sample sizes, standardized outcome documentation, and long-term follow-up are required to confirm these preliminary results.
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.