ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021
Metrics of OsteoChondral Allografts (MOCA) Group Consensus Statements on the Use of Viable Osteochondral Allograft.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes for Immediate Unrestricted Weightbearing Versus Restricted Rehabilitation Protocols After Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation to the Distal Femur.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Osteochondral Allografts: Pearls to Maximize Biologic Healing and Clinical Success.Arthroscopy techniques · 2023Article
- Article
- Application of 3D Modeling Software to Preoperative MRI for Prediction of Surface Area of Tissue Applied During Osteochondral Allograft Reconstruction of the Knee.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Article
- Preventing Osteoarthritis After an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: An Osteoarthritis Action Alliance Consensus Statement.Journal of athletic training · 2023Article
- Osteochondral Allografts in Knee Surgery: Narrative Review of Evidence to Date.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOsteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation has evolved into a first-line treatment for large chondral and osteochondral defects, aided by advancements in storage protocols and a growing body of clinical evidence supporting successful clinical outcomes and long-term survivorship. Despite the body of literature supporting OCAs, there still remains controversy and debate in the surgical application of OCA, especially where high-level evidence is lacking. PURPOSE: To develop consensus among an expert group with extensive clinical and scientific experience in OCA, addressing controversies in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral defects with OCA transplantation. STUDY
designConsensus statement.
methodsA focus group of clinical experts on OCA cartilage restoration participated in a 3-round modified Delphi process to generate a list of statements and establish consensus. Questions and statements were initially developed on specific topics that lack scientific evidence and lead to debate and controversy in the clinical community. In-person discussion occurred where statements were not agreed on after 2 rounds of voting. After final voting, the percentage of agreement and level of consensus were characterized. A systematic literature review was performed, and the level of evidence and grade were established for each statement.
resultsSeventeen statements spanning surgical technique, graft matching, indications, and rehabilitation reached consensus after the final round of voting. Of the 17 statements that reached consensus, 11 received unanimous (100%) agreement, and 6 received strong (80%-99%) agreement.
conclusionThe outcomes of this study led to the establishment of consensus statements that provide guidance on surgical and perioperative management of OCAs. The findings also provided insights on topics requiring more research or high-quality studies to further establish consensus and provide stronger evidence.
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.