Search

Purpose: In symptomatic mid‐sized focal chondral defects, autologous matrix‐induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) and minced cartilage implantation (MCI) offer two versatile treatment options. This study aimed to conduct a matched‐patient analysis of patient‐reported outcome measures to compare these two surgical treatment methods for focal chondral defects. Methods: At the first centre, patients underwent a single‐stage procedure in which autologous cartilage was hand‐minced, implanted into the defect and fixed with fibrin glue. At the second centre, patients underwent AMIC, which was fixed in place with fibrin glue. All patients were seen 2–4 years postoperatively. Postoperative outcomes were assessed using the visual analogue scale for pain (VAS), the Lysholm score and the five domains of the knee osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS). Patients from each surgical centre were matched by age, sex, defect size and defect localisation. Results: In total, 48 patients from two surgical centres (24 from each site) were matched for sex, age (MCI 30.3 ± 14.9 years vs. AMIC 30.8 ± 13.7 years) and defect size (MCI 2.49 ± 1.5 cm2 vs. AMIC 2.65 ± 1.1 cm2). Significantly better scores in the AMIC cohort were noted for VAS (p = 0.004), Lysholm (p = 0.043) and the KOOS subscales for pain (p = 0.016) and quality of life (p = 0.036). There was a significantly greater proportion of positive responders for Lysholm in the AMIC group (92%) compared with the MCI group (64%). Conclusions: The AMIC procedure delivers superior patient outcomes compared with hand‐minced autologous cartilage implantation. These are mid‐term outcomes, with follow‐up between 2 and 4 years. Level of Evidence: Level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The objective of this investigation was to compare different techniques to improve visualization and reduction in tibial plateau fractures involving the central lateral segments. Methods: Matched pairs of pre-fractured cadaveric tibial plateau fractures that include the central lateral segments were treated by either an anterolateral approach (supine) or PL approach (prone). Reduction was stepwise extended by additional fracturoscopy (FS), nanoscopy (NS) and lastly by epicondyle osteotomy (ECO). Reduction was analyzed by 3D scan and visualization of the lateral plateau was quantified. Results: Ten specimens (3 pairs 41B3.1, 2 pairs 41C3.3) were analyzed. Fracture steps involving the antero-latero-central (ALC) segment were insufficiently reduced after fluoroscopy using both approaches (AL 2.2 ± 1.2 mm vs PL 2.2 ± 1.0 mm, p 0.95). Additional NS and ECO achieved optimized fracture reduction in the ALC segment (NS AL 1.6 ± 1.3 mm vs PL 0.8 ± 0.9 mm, p 0.32). NS provided visualization of the entire lateral plateau (PL 102.9% ± 7.4, AL 108.8 ± 19.2%), while fracturoscopy only allowed visualization of the ALL segment and partially of PLL and ALC segments (PL 22.0 ± 23.4%, AL 29.7 ± 18.3%). Conclusion: Optimized reduction of tibial head fractures with involvement of latero-central segments requires additional video-assisted reduction or extended approaches. Nanoscopy helps visualizing of the entire lateral plateau, when compared to fracturoscopy and may become a valuable reduction aid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]