PURPOSE: Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) has been in use for chondral defect repair since 2000, but to date, only little is known about its histological outcomes in the repair of knee cartilage defects. This prospective multicentre study aims to evaluate (1) the quality of the repair tissue obtained from biopsies taken during second-look arthroscopy and (2) the relationship between the histological outcome, the macroscopic appearance of the repair and the patients' functional status. METHODS: Thirty-three second-look core biopsies from 30 patients treated with MACI were analysed. At the time of biopsy, the surgeon reported the reason for the second-look arthroscopy, the quality of the repair tissue and the patient's functional status on a standardised form. Biopsies together with patient data were sent to our centre to undergo blind histological evaluation and data analysis. RESULTS: The median overall ICRS II histological score of the examined population was 57 (1st-3rd quartile 41-75). According to the ICRS cartilage repair assessment (CRA) arthroscopic evaluation, 10 biopsies (30%) were classified as normal, 17 (51%) as nearly normal, 4 (12%) as abnormal and 2 (6%) as severely abnormal. The histological outcome was not significantly related either to the macroscopic appearance of the lesion or to the patient's functional status at the time of biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: In the examined population, the macroscopic appearance of the repair tissue gave an overly favourable impression in comparison with the real histological composition of the tissue, which was possibly still maturing in many cases. The healing process after MACI needs to be better understood through a larger histological study, and a longer follow-up is needed to better clarify the relationship between histology and long-term functional status. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE: Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) has been in use for chondral defect repair since 2000, but to date, only little is known about its histological outcomes in the repair of knee cartilage defects. This prospective multicentre study aims to evaluate (1) the quality of the repair tissue obtained from biopsies taken during second-look arthroscopy and (2) the relationship between the histological outcome, the macroscopic appearance of the repair and the patients' functional status. METHODS: Thirty-three second-look core biopsies from 30 patients treated with MACI were analysed. At the time of biopsy, the surgeon reported the reason for the second-look arthroscopy, the quality of the repair tissue and the patient's functional status on a standardised form. Biopsies together with patient data were sent to our centre to undergo blind histological evaluation and data analysis. RESULTS: The median overall ICRS II histological score of the examined population was 57 (1st-3rd quartile 41-75). According to the ICRS cartilage repair assessment (CRA) arthroscopic evaluation, 10 biopsies (30%) were classified as normal, 17 (51%) as nearly normal, 4 (12%) as abnormal and 2 (6%) as severely abnormal. The histological outcome was not significantly related either to the macroscopic appearance of the lesion or to the patient's functional status at the time of biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: In the examined population, the macroscopic appearance of the repair tissue gave an overly favourable impression in comparison with the real histological composition of the tissue, which was possibly still maturing in many cases. The healing process after MACI needs to be better understood through a larger histological study, and a longer follow-up is needed to better clarify the relationship between histology and long-term functional status. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Authors: Pierre Mainil-Varlet; Thomas Aigner; Mats Brittberg; Peter Bullough; Anthony Hollander; Ernst Hunziker; Rita Kandel; Stefan Nehrer; Kenneth Pritzker; Sally Roberts; Edouard Stauffer Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Bernhard J Tins; Iain W McCall; Tomoki Takahashi; Victor Cassar-Pullicino; Sally Roberts; Brian Ashton; James Richardson Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-12-22 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Antonio Gigante; Claudia Bevilacqua; Massimo Cappella; Sandra Manzotti; Francesco Greco Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Paola Brun; Sally C Dickinson; Barbara Zavan; Roberta Cortivo; Anthony P Hollander; Giovanni Abatangelo Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2008-11-11 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Philip P Roessler; Bernhard Pfister; Markus Gesslein; Jens Figiel; Thomas J Heyse; Christian Colcuc; Olaf Lorbach; Turgay Efe; Karl F Schüttler Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-02-13 Impact factor: 3.075