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: 3.23). 09/2010; 92(12):2220-33. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00049
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment of articular cartilage injuries to the knee remains a considerable challenge today. Current procedures succeed in providing relief of symptoms, however damaged articular tissue is not replaced with new tissue of the same biomechanical properties and long-term durability as normal hyaline cartilage. Despite many arthroscopic procedures that often manage to achieve these goals, results are far from perfect and there is no agreement on which of these procedures are appropriate, particularly when full-thickness chondral defects are considered.Therefore, the search for biological solution in long-term functional healing and increasing the quality of wounded cartilage has been continuing. For achieving this goal and apply in wide defects, scaffolds are developed.The rationale of using a scaffold is to create an environment with biodegradable polymers for the in vitro growth of living cells and their subsequent implantation into the lesion area. Previously a few numbers of surgical treatment algorithm was described in reports, however none of them contained one-step or two -steps scaffolds. The ultimate aim of this article was to review various arthroscopic treatment options for different stage lesions and develop a new treatment algorithm which included the scaffolds.
    World journal of orthopedics. 11/2014; 5(5):677-84.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recently, many clinical studies have been published regarding platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection for early degenerative joint disease. We evaluated the cartilage repair potential of platelet-rich plasma when injected into the knee joint. Articular, cartilage defects 4 mm in diameter and circular in shape were made in the trochlear region of 20 knees in 10 New Zealand white rabbits who were divided into two groups. The left knees in the control group underwent microfracture, and the right knees in the experimental group underwent microfracture with subsequent injection of platelet-rich plasma. At week 12 following the surgery, the cartilage was observed macroscopically and histologically compared in the two groups. The control group showed incomplete and irregular fibrous tissue formation in the defect. The experimental group showed nearly complete defect coverage with neo-cartilage. In the histologic scoring, comparison of the control group and the experimental group differed significantly (p < 0.05).Therefore, injection of platelet-rich plasma used to treat articular cartilage defects of the knee appears to have some effect for cartilage regeneration.
    Fetal ovine model for in-situ esophagus tissue engineering. 04/2014; 11(2):178-185. · 0.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of our investigations was to measure, in a co-culture condition, the immunoresponse to allogeneic or xeno-genic cells, selected as potential sources for cell therapy of arthritis. We challenged human spleen-derived cells (hSpl) by three different mechanisms: 1) exposure to donor allogeneic or xenogeneic cellular antigens; 2) exposure to donor cells transduced with adenoviral antigens (Ad) and 3) lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a known inflammatory immunostimu-lant. The immunoresponse to allogeneic human synovial-derived mesenchymal stromal cells alone or transduced with adenoviral green fluorescent protein (hSD-MSC or hSD-MSC/GFP) or the immunoresponse to xenogeneic equine mesenchymal stromal cells (eqMSC) or equine dermal fibroblasts (eqDFb), characterized by the proportion of CD3 + , CD4 + , and CD8 + human splenocytes (hSpl), was measured on Day 0 and Day 6 of co-culture by flow cytometry. In culture with hSD-MSC, hSD-MSC/GFP, eqDFb, or eqMSC, the proportion of CD3 + and CD8 + hSpl increased with time in culture but not with exposure to cell allo-or xeno-antigens. Both hSD-MSC and hSD-MSC/GFP increased in number during culture and were not affected in viability or proliferation by co-culture with allogeneic hSpl. In this in vitro, pri-mary exposure study, hSpl demonstrated a natural selection and adaptation to a short-term cell culture environment, and that neither allogeneic nor xenogeneic cell antigens incited a greater cellular immunoactivation than co-cultured hSpl alone.