Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38488230›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2024

Reliability and Accuracy of the Outerbridge Classification in Staging of Cartilage Defects.

Moritz Mederake, Vivien Scheibe, Philipp Dalheimer, Daniel Schüll, Danalache Marina, Ulf Krister Hofmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. ACL rupture from medial meniscus tear and high tibial slope: Case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Moritz MederakeDepartment of Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, BG Klinik, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Vivien ScheibeMedical Faculty of the University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Philipp DalheimerOrthopaedic Practice Nagold-Riedt, Chan, Dalheimer, Nagold, Germany.
Daniel SchüllDepartment of Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, BG Klinik, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Danalache MarinaMedical Faculty of the University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7217-2499
Ulf Krister HofmannMedical Faculty of the University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe decision on whether or not and how to treat a local cartilage defect is still made intraoperatively based on the visual presentation of the cartilage and findings from indentations with an arthroscopic probe. The treatment decision is then usually based on grading according to established classifications systems, which, therefore, need to have high reliability and accuracy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the Outerbridge classification in staging cartilage defects.

methodsWe performed an observer arthroscopic study using the Outerbridge classification on seven fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees, which collectively exhibited nine cartilage defects. To evaluate accuracy, defect severity was verified through histological examination. Interrater and intrarater reliabilites were calculated using Cohen's kappa and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC 3.1).

resultsThe interrater and intrarater reliability for the Outerbridge classification ranged from poor to substantial, with 0.24 ≤ κ ≤ 0.70 and κ = 0.55 to κ = 0.66, respectively. The accuracy evaluated by comparison with the histological examination was 63% overall. The erroneous evaluations were, however, still often at the discrimination of grade 2 and 3. We did not find any relationship between higher experience and accuracy or intraobserver reliability. Taken together, these results encourage surgeons to further use diagnostic arthroscopy for evaluating cartilage lesions. Nevertheless, especially in grade 2 and 3, deviations from the histology were observed. This is, however, the point where a decision is made on whether to surgically address the defect or not.

conclusionDiagnostic arthroscopy is the standard for cartilage lesion assessment, yet interobserver reliability is fair to substantial. Caution is warranted in interpreting varied observer results. The accuracy of the "simpler" Outerbridge classification is insufficient compared to histological examinations, highlighting the need for improved techniques in guideline-based intraoperative decision-making.

Indexed as

ArthroscopyCadaverCartilage, ArticularObserver VariationAgedCartilage DiseasesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsArthroscopyArticular CartilageHistologyOsteoarthritisOuterbridge Classification

Identifiers

PMID38488230
PMCPMC11062859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.