Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40964061›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025

Cartilage Conundrum: Investigating Outcomes in Knee Cartilage Restoration Techniques.

Nolan M Reinhart, Jackson P Tate, Onyebuchi A Imonugo, Wendell M Heard, William F Sherman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

5 authors.

Nolan M ReinhartTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8153-8652
Jackson P TateTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Onyebuchi A ImonugoTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Wendell M HeardTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
William F ShermanTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4097-5668

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Management of chondral injury can be difficult due to the avascularity of articular cartilage and the limited ability to proliferate and promote repair. Untreated lesions can lead to early development of arthritis and the need for joint replacement. For intermediate-sized lesions, osteochondral autograft transfer and autologous cell-based cartilage treatment have been accepted as the most effective treatment options. Purpose: To investigate the rates of complications within 2 years of initial surgery in patients who undergo primary autologous cell-based cartilage treatment and osteochondral autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed on July 17, 2024, using a commercially available insurance claims database to investigate 2-year orthopaedic complication rates in 1298 patients after primary osteochondral autograft and autologous cell-based cartilage treatment for chondral injuries of the knee. Patient cohorts were propensity score matched with a caliper set to 0.2 at a ratio of 1 to 1 on the following variables: age, sex, diabetes, and tobacco use. Rates of surgical complications were compared using multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex, diabetes, obesity, and tobacco use. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for each comparison. Results: A total of 1298 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Patients who underwent autologous cell-based cartilage treatment were significantly more likely to need revision cartilage restoration surgery compared with those who underwent osteochondral autograft treatment (11.1% vs 7.4%; OR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.08-2.34]). There was no significant difference in the rate of progression to osteoarthritis (11.4% vs 10.6%; OR, 1.15; [95% CI, 0.80-1.65]) or subsequent knee arthroplasty (0.5% vs 1.1%; OR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.11-2.06]) within 2 years of initial procedure between the treatment cohorts. Conclusion: This study highlights the increased risk of revision for patients who underwent autologous cell-based cartilage treatment compared with those who underwent osteochondral autograft treatment. However, no significant difference was identified in progression to osteoarthritis or subsequent knee arthroplasty within 2 years after the initial procedure. Further studies that evaluate long-term outcomes and the progression of symptoms are needed.

Indexed as

autologous chondrocyte implantationcartilage restorationchondral defectosteochondral autograft

Identifiers

PMID40964061
PMCPMC12437190

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.