Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2024
Differential analysis of the impact of lesions' location on clinical and radiological outcomes after the implantation of a novel aragonite-based scaffold to treat knee cartilage defects.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical Technique for Treating Focal Osteochondral Knee Lesions Using an Aragonite-Based Biphasic Scaffold.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- Prognostic Role of Lesion Morphology in Patellar Osteochondral Fixation: Influence of Localization and Size on Functional and Pain Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Aragonite-Based Scaffolds Are Effective Osteochondral Graft Substitutes for Osteochondral Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Clinical Experience With an Aragonite-Based Scaffold Implant for Knee Cartilage Repair: A Multicenter Case Series.Cureus · 2025Article
- Current Utilization of Gel-Based Scaffolds and Templates in Foot and Ankle Surgery-A Review.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Report on Evolving Indications, Techniques, and Outcome of Novel and Innovative Surgical procedure - Agili C®.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Osteochondral solutions for cartilage lesions of the knee: a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2025Review
- Combination of Cartiheal and Osteochondral Allograft for the Treatment of Multifocal Cartilage Defects.Video journal of sports medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is limited comparative evidence on patient outcomes following cartilage repair in various knee compartments. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and imaging outcomes after treating cartilage defects in femoral condyles and trochlea with either an aragonite-based scaffold or surgical standard of care (SSoC, i.e., debridement/microfractures) in a large multicentre randomized controlled trial.
methods247 patients with up to three knee joint surface lesions (ICRS grade IIIa or above) in the femoral condyles, trochlea or both ("mixed"), were enrolled and randomized to surgery with either a cell-free aragonite scaffold or SSoC. Patients were followed for up to 48 months by analysing subjective scores (KOOS and IKDC), radiological outcomes (defect filling on MRI), as well as treatment failure rates and adverse events. A differential analysis of outcomes for condylar, trochlear and mixed lesions was performed.
resultsThe scaffold group significantly outperformed the SSoC group regardless of lesion location with statistically significantly better KOOS Overall scores at 24 months (all p ≤ 0.0009) and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.02). Similar results were observed for KOOS subscales and IKDC scores. For KOOS responder rates, superiority of the implant group was demonstrated at 24, 36, and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.004). Higher defect filling on MRI for implants was observed for all locations. Lower treatment failure rates for the implant were observed in condylar and mixed lesions.
conclusionThe aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective regardless of the defect location, providing superior clinical and radiological outcomes compared to SSoC up to four years follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I - Randomized controlled trial.
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.