Literature DB >> 24161708

A histological comparison of the repair tissue formed when using either Chondrogide(®) or periosteum during autologous chondrocyte implantation.

H S McCarthy1, S Roberts.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we compare the clinical and histological outcome between periosteum and Chondrogide(®) during autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI).
METHOD: This study consisted of 88 patients having received ACI in the knee; 33 treated with Chondrogide(®) (ACI-C) and 55 with periosteum (ACI-P). Post-operative biopsies were taken at a mean of 16.6 ± 8 months (range 7-37 months) and 19 ± 18.4 months (range 4-114) for ACI-C and ACI-P respectively. Histological assessment was performed using the ICRS II and OsScore scoring systems. The immunolocalisation of elastin and collagen types I and II was analysed using specific antibodies. Lysholm scores, a measure of knee function, were obtained pre- and post-operatively at the time of biopsy and annually thereafter.
RESULTS: Compared with ACI-P, the repair tissue formed from patients treated with ACI-C demonstrated a significantly higher score for cellular morphology (ICRS II score), significantly better surface morphology from medial femoral condyle treated defects (ICRS II score) and a significantly higher proportion of hyaline cartilage formation (OsScore). Elastin fibres were present in both ACI-C and ACI-P samples, although their presence was very variable in quantity, distribution, orientation, thickness and length. Patients treated with ACI-C demonstrated significantly more collagen type II immunolocalisation compared with ACI-P. Both groups exhibited a significant increase in Lysholm score post-ACI.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a significantly better quality of repair tissue formed with ACI-C compared with ACI-P. Hence Chondrogide(®) is perhaps a better alternative to periosteum during ACI.
Copyright © 2013 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autologous chondrocyte implantation; Cartilage repair; Chondrogide(®); Histology; Periosteum

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24161708     DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.10.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage        ISSN: 1063-4584            Impact factor:   6.576


  18 in total

Review 1.  The comparison between the different generations of autologous chondrocyte implantation with other treatment modalities: a systematic review of clinical trials.

Authors:  Ely Zarina Samsudin; Tunku Kamarul
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  What is the effect of matrices on cartilage repair? A systematic review.

Authors:  James D Wylie; Melissa K Hartley; Ashley L Kapron; Stephen K Aoki; Travis G Maak
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Translating Periosteum's Regenerative Power: Insights From Quantitative Analysis of Tissue Genesis With a Periosteum Substitute Implant.

Authors:  Shannon R Moore; Céline Heu; Nicole Y C Yu; Renee M Whan; Ulf R Knothe; Stefan Milz; Melissa L Knothe Tate
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 6.940

Review 4.  Autologous chondrocyte implantation: Is it likely to become a saviour of large-sized and full-thickness cartilage defect in young adult knee?

Authors:  Chi Zhang; You-Zhi Cai; Xiang-Jin Lin
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Low postoperative complication rate with high survival rate and good clinical outcome 9 years after autologous chondrocyte transplantation of the knee joint.

Authors:  Yannick J Ehmann; Thekla Esser; Amr Seyam; Marco-Christopher Rupp; Julian Mehl; Sebastian Siebenlist; Andreas B Imhoff; Philipp Minzlaff
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-10-05       Impact factor: 2.928

Review 6.  Progress and prospect of technical and regulatory challenges on tissue-engineered cartilage as therapeutic combination product.

Authors:  Xiaolei Guo; Yuan Ma; Yue Min; Jiayi Sun; Xinli Shi; Guobiao Gao; Lei Sun; Jiadao Wang
Journal:  Bioact Mater       Date:  2022-06-27

7.  Cellular and Acellular Approaches for Cartilage Repair: A Philosophical Analysis.

Authors:  Mats Brittberg
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 8.  Where is human-based cellular pharmaceutical R&D taking us in cartilage regeneration?

Authors:  Damla Alkaya; Cansu Gurcan; Pelin Kilic; Acelya Yilmazer; Gunhan Gurman
Journal:  3 Biotech       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 2.406

9.  First-generation versus second-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation for treatment of cartilage defects of the knee: a matched-pair analysis on long-term clinical outcome.

Authors:  Philipp Niemeyer; Gian Salzmann; Matthias Feucht; Jan Pestka; Stella Porichis; Peter Ogon; Norbert Südkamp; Hagen Schmal
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Direct comparison of different surgical approaches in a woman with bilateral osteochondrosis dissecans of her knees: a case report.

Authors:  Marco M Schneider; Stefan Preiss; Gian M Salzmann
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2016-01-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.