Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39497425›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2025

Autologous chondrocyte implantation, matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation, osteochondral autograft transplantation and osteochondral allograft improve knee function and pain with considerations for patient and cartilage defects characteristics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Joseph E Nassar, Grace Guerin, Taidhgin Keel, Raffaella Russo, Filippo Familiari, Luke V Tollefson, Robert F LaPrade

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Outcomes of surgical fixation of osteochondral fracture: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Joseph E NassarDepartment of Orthopedics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Grace GuerinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Twin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, USA.
Taidhgin KeelDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Twin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, USA.
Raffaella RussoDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Nutrition Unit, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy.
Filippo FamiliariDepartment of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3453-2043
Luke V TollefsonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Twin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, USA.
Robert F LaPradeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Twin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

ON Foundation, Switzerland
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious studies have reported on the outcomes of autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) versus matrix-induced ACI (MACI) and microfracture. Specific clinical outcomes of ACI, MACI, osteochondral autograft transplantation (OAT) and osteochondral allograft (OCA) have not been well studied. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the outcomes of these regenerative surgical techniques with an emphasis on comparing their effectiveness using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, the Tegner Activity Scale and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score for the surgical treatment of tibiofemoral joint cartilage defects.

methodsAn electronic search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies that reported clinical outcomes for ACI, MACI, OAT and OCA procedures. The literature review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and only studies involving cartilage defects in the tibiofemoral joint were included. Outcomes were measured with the IKDC evaluation, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Scale and the VAS. Outcomes were compared to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The methodological quality of the included studies was analyzed by the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies and the Jadad scale.

resultsForty-seven studies were included representing a total of 1993 patients with a mean follow-up time of 57.2 ± 40.3 months (range: 4.0-160.0 months). The location of cartilage defects was reported in 46 studies, with a total of 1922 cartilage defects. There were 1277 medial femoral condyle cartilage defects, 488 lateral femoral condyle cartilage defects, 139 unspecified femoral condyle cartilage defects and 18 tibial plateau cartilage defects. All four procedures reported significant improvements in the Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner and VAS scores with no significant differences between them. The OAT technique surpassed the PASS threshold for the IKDC score while all four techniques surpassed the PASS threshold for Tegner and Lysholm scores. Additionally, all procedures met the MCID for each clinical outcome.

conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that ACI, MACI, OAT and OCA all result in significant improvements in knee function and pain for cartilage defects of the tibiofemoral joint. When selecting a procedure, patient and cartilage defect characteristics should be assessed to determine the best technique for each individual patient. STUDY

designSystematic review and meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Indexed as

Cartilage, ArticularChondrocytesKnee InjuriesKnee JointAllograftsHumansTransplantation, AutologousTransplantation, Homologousautologous chondrocyte implantationmatrix‐induced autologous chondrocyte implantationosteochondral allograftosteochondral autograft transplantationpatient reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID39497425
PMCPMC12310097

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.