Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31855062›Full record

SynthesisCartilage2021

Return-to-Play and Rehabilitation Protocols following Cartilage Restoration Procedures of the Knee: A Systematic Review.

Eoghan T Hurley, Martin S Davey, M Shazil Jamal, Amit K Manjunath, Michael J Alaia, Eric J Strauss

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cartilage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Rehabilitation, Restrictions, and Return to Sport After Cartilage Procedures.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eoghan T HurleyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7696-2981
Martin S DaveyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
M Shazil JamalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Amit K ManjunathDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Michael J AlaiaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Eric J StraussDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
NYU Langone Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature and to evaluate the reported rehabilitation protocols, return-to-play guidelines, and subsequent rates of return to play following cartilage restoration procedures in the knee.

designMEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the PRISMA guidelines to find studies on cartilage restoration procedures in the knee, including (1) microfracture (Mfx), (2) osteochondral autograft transfer (AOT), (3) osteochondral allograft implantation (OCA), and (4) autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). Studies were included if they reported return-to-play data or rehabilitation protocols.

resultsOverall, 179 studies fit our inclusion criteria, with 48 on Mfx, 34 on AOT, 54 on OCA, and 51 on ACI. The rate of return to play was reported as high as 88.2% with AOT, and as low as 77.2% following OCA, with rates of return to play at the same/higher level as high as 79.3% with AOT, and as low as 57.3% following ACI. The average reported time of return to play was as low as 4.9 months with AOT, and as high as 11.6 months following ACI.

conclusionsThe majority of patients are able to return to play following cartilage restoration procedures in the knee, regardless of surgical procedure utilized. However, while the rate of return to play at the same level was similar to the overall rate of return following AOT, there was a large number of patients unable to return to the same level following Mfx, OCA, and ACI. Additionally, there is wide variety in the rehabilitation protocols, and scant literature on return-to-play protocols.

Indexed as

Cartilage DiseasesRehabilitationReturn to SportAllograftsCartilage, ArticularChondrocytesHumansKneeKnee JointTransplantation, Autologousautologous chondrocyte implantationcartilagekneemicrofractureosteochondral allograftosteochondral autograftrehabilitationreturn to play

Identifiers

PMID31855062
PMCPMC8808781
OpenAlexW2994848550

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.