ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024
Arthroscopic Measurements Predict Knee Chondral Lesion Size More Accurately Than Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Mechanism of Injury Influences Ability of Either Technique to Predict Graft Size.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- MRI assessment of autologous osteochondral transplantation in talus: correlation with clinical outcomes and second look.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare osteochondral defect size measurements and characteristics across magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and arthroscopy and at the time of osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation or autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). Methods: Patients who underwent ACI and OCA transplantation at a single institution between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients were excluded if they had severe osteoarthritis, MRI scans were not available for review, surgical records did not include defect sizing necessary for analysis, or operative reports were not available. Osteochondral lesion characteristics including size were collected preoperatively by MRI and arthroscopy and at the time of definitive open surgical intervention. Subgroup analysis was performed comparing measurement techniques depending on the corrective surgical approach used, as well as depending on the mechanism of chondral injury, to determine whether these factors had any effect on the ability of arthroscopy or MRI to predict graft size. Results: Overall, 136 chondral lesions were addressed, with restoration procedures in 117 patients (mean age, 32.5 years). The average difference between the final graft size and the lesion area measured with index arthroscopy was 116 mm Conclusions: Chondral lesion size as determined by preoperative MRI is less accurate than arthroscopic measurement. The mechanism of injury leading to chondral damage and degree of damage may influence the ability of MRI and arthroscopy to accurately measure chondral lesions and predict the final graft size used in surgical correction. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.
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.