Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation A Systematic Review

Division of Sports Medicine Cartilage Repair Center, Department of Orthopaedics, The Ohio State University Sports Medicine Center, 2050 Kenny Road, Suite 3100, Columbus, OH 43221-3502, USA.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Impact Factor: 5.28). 09/2010; 92(12):2220-33. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00049
Source: PubMed


The purpose of the present study was to determine (1) whether the current literature supports the choice of using autologous chondrocyte implantation over other cartilage procedures with regard to clinical outcome, magnetic resonance imaging, arthroscopic assessment, and durability of treatment, (2) whether the current literature supports the use of a specific generation of autologous chondrocyte implantation, and (3) whether there are patient-specific and defect-specific factors that influence outcomes after autologous chondrocyte implantation in comparison with other cartilage repair or restoration procedures.
We conducted a systematic review of multiple databases in which we evaluated Level-I and II studies comparing autologous chondrocyte implantation with another cartilage repair or restoration technique as well as comparative intergenerational studies of autologous chondrocyte implantation. The methodological quality of studies was evaluated with use of Delphi list and modified Coleman methodology scores. Effect size analysis was performed for all outcome measures.
Thirteen studies (917 subjects) were included. Study methodological quality improved with later publication dates. The mean modified Coleman methodology score was 54 (of 100). Patients underwent autologous chondrocyte implantation (n = 604), microfracture (n = 271), or osteochondral autograft (n = 42). All surgical techniques demonstrated improvement in comparison with the preoperative status. Three of seven studies showed better clinical outcomes after autologous chondrocyte implantation in comparison with microfracture after one to three years of follow-up, whereas one study showed better outcomes two years after microfracture and three other studies showed no difference in these treatments after one to five years. Clinical outcomes after microfracture deteriorated after eighteen to twenty-four months (in three of seven studies). Autologous chondrocyte implantation and osteochondral autograft demonstrated equivalent short-term clinical outcomes, although there was more rapid improvement after osteochondral autograft (two studies). Although outcomes were equivalent between first and second-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation and between open and arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation, complication rates were higher with open, periosteal-cover, first-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation (four studies). Younger patients with a shorter preoperative duration of symptoms and fewer prior surgical procedures had the best outcomes after both autologous chondrocyte implantation and microfracture. A defect size of >4 cm(2) was the only factor predictive of better outcomes when autologous chondrocyte implantation was compared with a non-autologous chondrocyte implantation surgical technique.
Cartilage repair or restoration in the knee provides short-term success with microfracture, autologous chondrocyte implantation, or osteochondral autograft. There are patient-specific and defect-specific factors that influence clinical outcomes.

47 Reads
    • "Currently, clinical interventional strategies for cartilage repair include arthroscopic resurfacing, bone marrow stimulation techniques (e.g., subchondral drilling), autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), and osteochondral transplantation. However, the main limitation of cartilage treatment options is the inability of traditional medicine to promote effective hyaline cartilage regeneration in the presence of regenerated fibrocartilage scar tissue, which hinders joint motion and leads to progressive degeneration [4]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The regeneration of hyaline cartilage remains clinically challenging. Here, we evaluated the therapeutic effects of using cell-free porous poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) graft implants (PGIs) along with early loading exercise to repair a full-thickness osteochondral defect. Rabbits were randomly allocated to a treadmill exercise (TRE) group or a sedentary (SED) group and were prepared as either a PGI model or an empty defect (ED) model. TRE was performed as a short-term loading exercise; SED was physical inactivity in a free cage. The knees were evaluated at 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. At the end of testing, none of the knees developed synovitis, formed osteophytes, or became infected. Macroscopically, the PGI-TRE group regenerated a smooth articular surface, with transparent new hyaline-like tissue soundly integrated with the neighboring cartilage, but the other groups remained distinct at the margins with fibrous or opaque tissues. In a micro-CT analysis, the synthesized bone volume/tissue volume (BV/TV) was significantly higher in the PGI-TRE group, which also had integrating architecture in the regeneration site. The thickness of the trabecular (subchondral) bone was improved in all groups from 6 to 12 weeks. Histologically, remarkable differences in the cartilage regeneration were visible. At week 6, compared with SED groups, the TRE groups manifested modest inflammatory cells with pro-inflammatory cytokines (i.e., TNF-α and IL-6), improved collagen alignment and higher glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content, particularly in the PGI-TRE group. At week 12, the PGI-TRE group had the best regeneration outcomes, showing the formation of hyaline-like cartilage, the development of columnar rounded chondrocytes that expressed enriched levels of collagen type II and GAG, and functionalized trabecular bone with osteocytes. In summary, the combination of implanting cell-free PLGA and performing an early loading exercise can significantly promote the full-thickness osteochondral regeneration in rabbit knee joint models.
    Acta biomaterialia 09/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.actbio.2015.09.026 · 6.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In case of damage, cartilage is not capable of healing as it is an avascular and aneural tissue; moreover, its cellular components, chondrocytes, have low mitotic ability [3, 4]. Cartilage lesions are generally believed to progress to severe forms of osteoarthritis [5, 6], leading to pathologic changes in the joints with consequent pain, inflammation, and functional disability [7, 8]. Injuries which reach the subchondral bone may induce a systemic reaction and generate reparative tissue. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Articular cartilage lesions are a particular challenge for regenerative medicine due to cartilage low self-ability repair in case of damage. Hence, a significant goal of musculoskeletal tissue engineering is the development of suitable structures in virtue of their matrix composition and biomechanical properties. The objective of our study was to design in vitro a supporting structure for autologous chondrocyte growth. We realized a biohybrid composite scaffold combining a novel and nonspecific extracellular matrix (ECM), which is decellularized Wharton’s jelly ECM, with the biomechanical properties of the synthetic hydrogel polyvinyl alcohol (PVA). Wharton’s jelly ECM was tested for its ability in promoting scaffold colonization by chondrocytes and compared with polyvinyl alcohol itself and the more specific decellularized cartilage matrix. Our preliminary evidences highlighted the chance of using Wharton’s jelly ECM in combination with PVA hydrogels as an innovative and easily available scaffold for cartilage restoration.
    BioMed Research International 07/2014; 2014(6):762189. DOI:10.1155/2014/762189 · 1.58 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In osteoarthritis (OA), a relative increase in the production of these enzymes can result in aberrant cartilage destruction . Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) of ex vivo expanded chondrocytes retaining ability to repopulate focal lesions of articular cartilage [2] is an important therapeutic aim in orthopaedics. When cultured in supporting 3D scaffold substitute structures, chondrocytes maintain the production of collagen type II, aggrecans, and MMP13, whereas in monolayer cultures they display a progressive loss of these characteristic proteins and eventually gain a fibroblast-like phenotype and switch to collagen type I expression instead of type II, that reflects a dedifferentiated status. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Articular chondrocytes are responsible for the maintenance of healthy articulations; indeed, dysregulation of their functions, including the production of matrix proteins and matrix-remodeling proteases, may result in fraying of the tissue and development of osteoarthritis (OA). To explore transcriptional mechanisms that contribute to the regulation of chondrocyte homeostasis and may be implicated in OA development, we compared the gene expression profile of a set of zinc finger proteins potentially linked to the control of chondrocyte differentiation and/or functions (ZNF423, ZNF470, ZNF521, and ZNF780B) in chondrocytes from patients affected by OA and from subjects not affected by OA. This analysis highlighted a significantly lower expression of the transcript encoding ZNF423 in chondrocytes from OA, particularly in elderly patients. Interestingly, this decrease was mirrored by the similarly reduced expression of PPARγ, a known target of ZNF423 with anti-inflammatory and chondroprotective properties. The ZNF521 mRNA instead was abundant in all primary chondrocytes studied; the RNAi-mediated silencing of this gene significantly altered the COL2A/COL1 expression ratio, associated with the maintenance of the differentiated phenotype, in chondrocytes cultivated in alginate beads. These results suggest a role for ZNF423 and ZNF521 in the regulation of chondrocyte homeostasis and warrant further investigations to elucidate their mechanism of action.
    Mediators of Inflammation 05/2014; 2014:318793. DOI:10.1155/2014/318793 · 3.24 Impact Factor
Show more