ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2021
Managing Chondral Lesions: A Literature Review and Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conservative Management of Focal Chondral Lesions of the Knee and Ankle: Current Concepts.Cells · 2025Review
- A comprehensive review of hip arthroscopy techniques and outcomes.SAGE open medicine · 2024Review
- Seamless and early gap healing of osteochondral defects by autologous mosaicplasty combined with bioactive supramolecular nanofiber-enabled gelatin methacryloyl (BSN-GelMA) hydrogel.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- From Single Batch to Mass Production-Automated Platform Design Concept for a Phase II Clinical Trial Tissue Engineered Cartilage Product.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArticular cartilage lesions are becoming increasingly common. Optimum diagnosis and management of chondral defects cause a lot of dilemma. A number of surgical methods have been reported in the literature for treating focal cartilage defects. There is a lack of consensus on the most effective management strategy, with newer surgical and cell-based treatments being advocated regularly. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA clinical review is constructed by appraising the published literature about clinical evaluation and diagnostic modalities for articular cartilage defects and subsequent surgical procedures, management strategies employed for such lesions. Prominent available databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane) were also searched for trials comparing functional outcomes following cartilage procedures. Synthesis of a practical management guideline is then attempted based on the evidence assessed.
resultsSystematic examination and optimal use of diagnostic imaging are an important facet of cartilage defect management. Patient and lesion factors greatly influence the outcome of cartilage procedures and must be considered while planning management. Smaller lesions < 2 cm
conclusionsMost treatment modalities have their role in appropriate cases and management needs to be individualized for patients. The search for the perfect cartilage restoration procedure continues.
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.