Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34778474›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021

Biologic Augmentation for the Operative Treatment of Osteochondral Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review.

Deepak V Chona, Stephanie T Kha, Paul D Minetos, Christopher M LaPrade, Constance R Chu, Geoffrey D Abrams, Marc R Safran, Seth L Sherman

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deepak V ChonaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Stephanie T KhaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Paul D MinetosDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Christopher M LaPradeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Constance R ChuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Geoffrey D AbramsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Marc R SafranDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Seth L ShermanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, California, USA.
Stanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVarious surgical treatment options exist for repairing, replacing, or regenerating tissue to fill osteochondral defects. Biologic augmentation has been increasingly studied as an adjunct in the surgical treatment of osteochondral defects of the knee in animal and human models. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of the study was to systematically review use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow concentrate (BMC) augmentation in the surgical treatment of osteochondral knee defects and to describe the outcomes. It was hypothesized that both PRP and BMC augmentation will result in improved outcomes in osteochondral knee surgery in both animal and human models. STUDY

designSystematic review.

methodsPubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched for studies relating to PRP or BMC and treatment of osteochondral defects of the knee, from database inception to February 1, 2020. Included were articles that (1) studied PRP or BMC augmentation; (2) used osteochondral autograft, allograft, or biologic scaffold; and (3) treated osteochondral defects in the knee. Data on use of PRP or BMC, outcomes assessed, and results were recorded for each publication.

resultsOf the 541 articles identified initially, 17 were included in the final review. Five articles studied osteochondral grafts in animals, 5 studied biologic scaffolds in animals, and 7 studied scaffolds or allografts in humans; the combined sample size was 202 patients. Of 4 histologic scaffold studies, 3 PRP-augmented scaffold studies identified histologic improvements in regenerated cartilage in animal models, while 1 BMC study demonstrated similar improvement in histologic scores of BMC-augmented scaffolds compared with controls. Three studies associated greater collagen type 2 and glycosaminoglycan content with PRP treatment. Comparative studies found that both augments increase osteogenic proteins, including bone morphogenetic protein-2 and osteoprotegerin. Two of 3 studies on BMC-augmented osteochondral allografts reported no difference in radiographic features postoperatively. Long-term improvement in clinical and radiographic outcomes of PRP-augmented scaffolds was demonstrated in 1 human study.

conclusionAnimal studies suggest that biologics possess potential as adjuncts to surgical treatment of osteochondral knee defects; however, clinical data remain limited.

Indexed as

augmentationbiologicsBMPosteochondralPRP

Identifiers

PMID34778474
PMCPMC8573505
OpenAlexW3213265337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.