PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the practice of microfracture surgery for knee chondral defects among Canadian orthopedic surgeons. METHODS: All orthopedic surgeon members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association were invited to participate in a survey, designed to explore the microfracture technique used by orthopedic surgeons in the treatment for knee chondral defects The primary outcome measure was an emailed 26-item questionnaire, which explored indications for microfracture surgery, surgical techniques, types of postoperative rehabilitation regimes used and assessment of outcome. In addition, responses were compared between orthopedic surgeons with a sports medicine practice to surgeons with a non-sports medicine practice. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 24.6% (299/1,216), with 131 regularly performing microfracture. 41% of surgeons indicated that they had no upper limit for age at the time of surgery, and 87% indicated no upper limit for body mass index. The majority of respondents (97%) resected cartilage back to a stable margin, while 69% of respondents removed the calcified cartilage layer prior to creating holes. Only 11% of respondents used continuous passive motion (CPM) postoperatively, and 39% did not restrict weight bearing. Sports surgeons were more likely than non-sports surgeons to remove the calcified cartilage layer, use a 45° pick, use CPM and restrict weight bearing postoperatively (all P values < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This survey on microfracture for knee chondral defects revealed widespread variation among surgeons regarding the indications for surgery, surgical technique, postoperative rehabilitation and assessment of outcome. Sports surgeons demonstrate better evidence-based practice than non-sports surgeons for a few important parameters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional survey, Level II.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the practice of microfracture surgery for knee chondral defects among Canadian orthopedic surgeons. METHODS: All orthopedic surgeon members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association were invited to participate in a survey, designed to explore the microfracture technique used by orthopedic surgeons in the treatment for knee chondral defects The primary outcome measure was an emailed 26-item questionnaire, which explored indications for microfracture surgery, surgical techniques, types of postoperative rehabilitation regimes used and assessment of outcome. In addition, responses were compared between orthopedic surgeons with a sports medicine practice to surgeons with a non-sports medicine practice. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 24.6% (299/1,216), with 131 regularly performing microfracture. 41% of surgeons indicated that they had no upper limit for age at the time of surgery, and 87% indicated no upper limit for body mass index. The majority of respondents (97%) resected cartilage back to a stable margin, while 69% of respondents removed the calcified cartilage layer prior to creating holes. Only 11% of respondents used continuous passive motion (CPM) postoperatively, and 39% did not restrict weight bearing. Sports surgeons were more likely than non-sports surgeons to remove the calcified cartilage layer, use a 45° pick, use CPM and restrict weight bearing postoperatively (all P values < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This survey on microfracture for knee chondral defects revealed widespread variation among surgeons regarding the indications for surgery, surgical technique, postoperative rehabilitation and assessment of outcome. Sports surgeons demonstrate better evidence-based practice than non-sports surgeons for a few important parameters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Cross-sectional survey, Level II.
Authors: P C Kreuz; M R Steinwachs; C Erggelet; S J Krause; G Konrad; M Uhl; N Südkamp Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: B R Mandelbaum; J E Browne; F Fu; L Micheli; J B Mosely; C Erggelet; T Minas; L Peterson Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 1998 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Kai Mithoefer; Riley J Williams; Russell F Warren; Hollis G Potter; Christopher R Spock; Edward C Jones; Thomas L Wickiewicz; Robert G Marx Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Peter C Kreuz; Christoph Erggelet; Matthias R Steinwachs; Stefanie J Krause; Andreas Lahm; Philipp Niemeyer; Nadir Ghanem; Markus Uhl; Norbert Südkamp Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Artur Kroell; Paul Marks; Jaskarndip Chahal; Mark Hurtig; Tim Dwyer; Daniel Whelan; John Theodoropoulos Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Jesus Medina; Ignacio Garcia-Mansilla; Peter D Fabricant; Thomas J Kremen; Seth L Sherman; Kristofer Jones Journal: Cartilage Date: 2020-09-10 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Adam B Yanke; Megan L Konopka; Davietta C Butty; Maximilian A Meyer; Eric J Cotter; Alejandro A Espinoza; Brian J Cole Journal: Cartilage Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Matthew S Shive; William D Stanish; Robert McCormack; Francisco Forriol; Nicholas Mohtadi; Stéphane Pelet; Jacques Desnoyers; Stéphane Méthot; Kendra Vehik; Alberto Restrepo Journal: Cartilage Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Gian M Salzmann; Philipp Niemeyer; Stephan Vogt; Peter Kreuz; Markus Arnold; Jürgen Fritz; Ayeesha Mujeeb; Ralf Rosenberger; Matthias Steinwachs; Peter Angele Journal: Springerplus Date: 2015-11-08