| Literature DB >> 19859695 |
Maartje Zengerink1, Peter A A Struijs, Johannes L Tol, Cornelis Niek van Dijk.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to summarize all eligible studies to compare the effectiveness of treatment strategies for osteochondral defects (OCD) of the talus. Electronic databases from January 1966 to December 2006 were systematically screened. The proportion of the patient population treated successfully was noted, and percentages were calculated. For each treatment strategy, study size weighted success rates were calculated. Fifty-two studies described the results of 65 treatment groups of treatment strategies for OCD of the talus. One randomized clinical trial was identified. Seven studies described the results of non-operative treatment, 4 of excision, 13 of excision and curettage, 18 of excision, curettage and bone marrow stimulation (BMS), 4 of an autogenous bone graft, 2 of transmalleolar drilling (TMD), 9 of osteochondral transplantation (OATS), 4 of autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), 3 of retrograde drilling and 1 of fixation. OATS, BMS and ACI scored success rates of 87, 85 and 76%, respectively. Retrograde drilling and fixation scored 88 and 89%, respectively. Together with the newer techniques OATS and ACI, BMS was identified as an effective treatment strategy for OCD of the talus. Because of the relatively high cost of ACI and the knee morbidity seen in OATS, we conclude that BMS is the treatment of choice for primary osteochondral talar lesions. However, due to great diversity in the articles and variability in treatment results, no definitive conclusions can be drawn. Further sufficiently powered, randomized clinical trials with uniform methodology and validated outcome measures should be initiated to compare the outcome of surgical strategies for OCD of the talus.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19859695 PMCID: PMC2809940 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-009-0942-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc ISSN: 0942-2056 Impact factor: 4.342
Results per treatment strategy
| Treatment strategy | No. of studies | No. of patients | No. of patients good/excellent result | Study weighted success rate (%) | Range (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-operative, rest | 3 | 86 | 39 | 45 | 20–54 |
| Non-operative, cast | 4 | 83 | 44 | 53 | 29–69 |
| Excision | 4 | 59 | 32 | 54 | 30–88 |
| Excision and curettage | 13 | 259 | 199 | 77 | 56–94 |
| Excision, curettage and BMS | 18 | 388 | 329 | 85 | 46–100 |
| Autogenous bone graft | 4 | 74 | 45 | 61 | 41–93 |
| TMD | 2 | 41 | 26 | 63 | 32–100 |
| OATS | 9 | 243 | 212 | 87 | 74–100 |
| ACI | 4 | 59 | 45 | 76 | 70–92 |
| Retrograde drilling | 3 | 42 | 37 | 88 | 81–100 |
| Fixation, bone pegs | 1 | 27 | 24 | 89 | – |
Described are the number of included studies per treatment strategy as mentioned in the first column, the cumulative number of patients per treatment strategy, the number of patients with a good or excellent result at follow-up, the success percentage per treatment strategy and finally the range of the success percentages
BMS bone marrow stimulation, ACI autologous chondrocyte implantation, OATS osteochondral autograft transfer system, TMD transmalleolar drilling
Scoring systems used for treatment of talar osteochondral lesions in the included studies
| Scoring system | No. of studies |
|---|---|
| AOFAS Ankle/Hindfoot scale | 16 |
| Scoring system developed by the authors | 18 |
| Hannover score | 5 |
| Patient satisfaction score | 5 |
| Criteria proposed by Berndt and Harty | 5 |
| Visual analog scale | 3 |
| Martin score | 3 |
| Alexander and Lichtman | 3 |
| Ogilvie Harris score | 2 |
| MODEMS | 2 |
| Karlsson scoring scale | 2 |
| Tegner score | 1 |
| Evaluation proposed by Loomer | 1 |
| Mazur score | 1 |
| Freiburg ankle score | 1 |
| SANE | 1 |
| According to Thompson and Loomer | 1 |
| McCullough score | 1 |
Some studies used more than one scoring system
Success percentages (patients with a good/excellent result at follow-up after treatment of an osteochondral talar lesion) of a previous review by Verhagen et al. [61] compared to the current review
| Treatment strategy | Verhagen et al. studies published up to 2000 (%) | Current review, studies published up to 2006 (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Non-operative treatment—rest | 45 | 45 |
| Non-operative treatment—cast | – | 53 |
| Excision | 38 | 54 |
| Excision and curettage | 76 | 77 |
| Excision, curettage and BMS | 86 | 85 |
| Autogenous bone graft | 85 | 61 |
| TMD | – | 63 |
| OATS | 94 | 87 |
| ACI | – | 76 |
| Retrograde drilling | 81 | 88 |
| Fixation | 73 | 89 |
| Total | 76 |
Criteria that were used
| Exclusion criteria | No. |
|---|---|
| Combination of diagnoses | 14 |
| Follow-up <6 months | 14 |
| Therapy inadequately described | 8 |
| <18 Years old | 17 |
| Single case report | 33 |
| Double publication | 17 |
| No well-defined outcome | 37 |
| <10 Patients | 37 |
| Combination of therapies | 25 |
| Total no. of excluded studies | 202 |
Number of assigned stars
| Study design | Selection | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
Every included study was separately assessed for quality using an adjusted version of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale, as described earlier. It was performed by scoring each study for study design (0–2 stars), selection of patients (0–1 star) and outcome (0–2 stars). The designs that earned a star are marked with a *. For each study, the total number of stars was noted in the box given