ArticleCartilage2021
Osteochondral Autograft Plugs versus Paste Graft:
Article in Cartilage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatients undergoing articular cartilage paste grafting have been shown in studies to have significant improvement in pain and function in long-term follow-ups. We hypothesized that
designThis institutional review board-approved study characterizes the effects of impacting osteochondral plugs harvested from the intercondylar notch of 16 patients into a paste, leaving one graft intact as a control. Cell viability/proliferation, collagen type I/II, SOX-9, and aggrecan gene expression via qRT-PCR (quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) were analyzed at 24 and 48 hours. Matrix production and cell morphology were evaluated using histology.
resultsPaste samples from patients (mean age 39.7) with moderate (19%) to severe (81%) cartilage lesions displayed 34% and 80% greater cell proliferation compared to plugs at 24 and 48 hours post processing, respectively (
conclusionsPaste graft preparation resulted in increased mobility of chondrocytes by matrix disruption without loss of cell viability. The impaction procedure stimulated chondrocyte proliferation resulting in a cellular response to reestablish native extracellular matrix. Analysis of gene expression supports a regenerative process of cartilage tissue formation and contradicts long-held beliefs that impaction trauma leads to immediate cell death. This mechanism of action translates into clinical benefit for patients with moderate to severe cartilage damage.
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.