ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2025
Aragonite-Based Scaffolds Are Effective Osteochondral Graft Substitutes for Osteochondral Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2025. 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.
- Biophysical signal-driven scaffold design for stem cell-guided osteochondral regeneration.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the outcomes and complication profiles after the implantation of aragonite-based scaffold osteochondral substitutes for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the knee. Methods: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we completed a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases in January 2025 to obtain studies reporting on outcomes after implantation of an aragonite-based scaffold in patients with osteochondral defects of the knee. Clinical studies were assessed for patient-reported outcome measures, failure rates, and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed and the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria were applied to appraise study quality. Results: Five studies were included for data analysis. In total, 526 patients with a mean age of 39.1 years (range, 31.6-42.0 years) were followed up for an average of 30.5 months (range, 12-78 months). Four studies evaluating Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores reported mean improvements of 16.1 to 41.0 from preoperatively to final follow-up. Three studies reported improvements of 23.1 to 43 in International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form scores. Failure, defined as any secondary intervention on the index knee, occurred in 0% to 13.6% of cases, and these rates were significantly lower than those for microfracture and arthroscopic debridement. Tapered scaffolds had lower failure rates than cylindrical designs (0% vs 8%-10.5%). Conclusions: Aragonite-based scaffolds in the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the knee show improved patient-reported outcomes and low failure rates at mean follow-up durations ranging from 12 to 78 months. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level I and IV studies.
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.