SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2023
Limited evidence in support of bone marrow aspirate concentrate as an additive to the bone marrow stimulation for osteochondral lesions of the talus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2023. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBone marrow aspirate concentrate can be used as an additive to surgical treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. This systematic literature review aims to study the effect of the additional use of bone marrow aspirate concentrate on top of a surgical treatment for osteochondral lesions of the talus on clinical outcomes compared to surgical treatment alone.
methodsAn online literature search was conducted using PubMed (Medline), Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane library for all studies comparing a surgical intervention with bone marrow aspirate concentrate, with a surgical intervention without bone marrow aspirate concentrate. The methodological quality was rated according to the methodological index for non-randomised studies checklist. The primary outcome measure were clinical outcomes. Secondary outcome measures consisted of revision rate, complication rate, radiographic outcome measures and histological analyses. Subgroups were created based on type of surgical intervention used in the studies. If multiple articles were included in a subgroup, a linear random-effects model was used to compare the bone marrow aspirate concentrate-augmented group with the control group.
resultsOut of 1006 studies found, eight studies with a total of 718 patients were included. The methodological quality, assessed according to the methodological index for non-randomised studies checklist, was weak. A significantly better functional outcome measures (p < 0.05) was found in the subgroup treated with bone marrow stimulation + bone marrow aspirate concentrate compared to the group treated with bone marrow stimulation alone, based on three non-blinded studies. No significant differences regarding clinical outcomes were found in the subgroups comparing matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation with matrix-induced bone marrow aspirate concentrate, osteochondral autologous transplantation alone with osteochondral autologous transplantation + bone marrow aspirate concentrate and autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis plus peripheral blood concentrate vs. matrix-associated stem cell transplantation bone marrow aspirate concentrate.
conclusionThere is insufficient evidence to support a positive effect on clinical outcomes of bone marrow aspirate concentrate as an additive to surgical treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. However, based on the safety reports and initial results, sufficiently powered, patient- and researcher-blinded, prospective randomised controlled trials are justified and recommended. Until then, we advise not to implement a therapy (addition of bone marrow aspirate concentrate) without clinical evidence that justifies the additional costs involved. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37962614What 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.