ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Scaffolds for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Last Ten Years Literature.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autologous Osteochondral Transplantation in Large Osteochondral Defects-A Follow-Up of 40 Patients After Talus Re-Surfacing.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical and functional outcomes of arthroscopic autologous collagen-induced chondrogenesis (ACIC) for osteochondral lesions of the talus: A retrospective case series.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Advances in retrograde techniques for osteochondral lesions: is there a different path we can take?Musculoskeletal surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scaffolds are widely used devices for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus (OCLT), aimed at enhancing mechanical stability and fostering chondrogenic differentiation. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the safety, and clinical and radiological results of scaffolds for OCLT management. On 2 January 2024, a search was performed in four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus), according to PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias in the included studies was also evaluated. Thirty clinical studies were included in the qualitative analysis: 12 retrospective case series, 3 retrospective comparative studies, 9 prospective case series, 1 prospective comparative study, and 1 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). Natural scaffolds, such as bilayer collagen (COLL)I/III and hyaluronic scaffolds, were the most employed. Only minor adverse events were observed, even if more serious complications were shown, especially after medial malleolar osteotomy. An overall clinical and radiological improvement was observed after a mean of 36.3 months of follow-up. Patient age and Body Mass Index (BMI), lesion size, and location were correlated with the clinical outcomes, while meta-analysis revealed significant improvement in clinical scores with hyaluronic scaffolds compared to microfracture alone. This study highlights the safety and positive clinical outcomes associated with the use of scaffolds for OCLT. In the few available comparative studies, scaffolds have also demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared to microfractures alone. Nevertheless, the analysis has shown the limitations of the current literature, characterized by an overall low quality and scarcity of RCTs.
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.