| Literature DB >> 29114627 |
Pietro Zedde1, Sebastiano Cudoni1, Lucia Manunta2, Eraldo Sanna Passino2, Gerolamo Masala2, Antonio Brunetti3, Francesco Mattia Uboldi4, Andrea Fabio Manunta4.
Abstract
Purpose To compare the macroscopic, histological, and immunohistochemical characteristics of the repair tissue of chondral defects treated with microfracture and nanofracture in an ovine model. Methods Full-thickness chondral lesions were created in the medial femoral condyle of both knees in four adult sheep and were treated with microfracture on one side and with nanofracture on the contralateral side. Chondral repair was assessed after 12 months by macroscopic, histological, and immunohistochemical analyses. Results Histological cartilage repair significantly improved in the samples treated with nanofracture for cellular morphological characteristics and cartilage architecture. The immunohistochemical analysis showed a significantly higher immunoreactivity to type II collagen in the defects treated with nanofracture. Conclusion Nanofracture provided better repair tissue than microfracture, with a more satisfactory cartilage architecture renovation and tissue having greater type II collagen content. Clinical Relevance Mesenchymal stem cell stimulation is the most frequently used primary cartilage repair procedure. Nanofracture represents a novel technique to stimulate bone marrow that results into a successful repair of chondral defects.Entities:
Keywords: articular cartilage repair; mesenchymal stem cells; microfracture; nanofracture; sheep
Year: 2017 PMID: 29114627 PMCID: PMC5672857 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1601412
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Joints ISSN: 2512-9090
Fig. 1( A ) Treatment of the defect with microfracture. ( B ) Treatment of the defect with nanofracture.
International Cartilage Repair Society macroscopic evaluation of cartilage repair
| Categories | Score |
|---|---|
| Degree of defect repair | |
| In level with surrounding cartilage | 4 |
| 75% repair of defect depth | 3 |
| 50% repair of defect depth | 2 |
| 25% repair of defect depth | 1 |
| 0% repair of defect depth | 0 |
| Integration to border zone | |
| Complete integration with surrounding cartilage | 4 |
| Demarcating border < 1 mm | 3 |
| ¾ of graft integrated, ¼ with a notable border > 1 mm width | 2 |
| ½ of graft integrated with surrounding cartilage, ½ with a notable border > 1 mm | 1 |
| From no contact to ¼ of graft integrated with surrounding cartilage | 0 |
| Macroscopic appearance | |
| Intact smooth surface | 4 |
| Fibrillated surface | 3 |
| Small, scattered fissures or cracs | 2 |
| Several, small or few but large fissures | 1 |
| Total degeneration of grafted area | 0 |
| Overall repair assessment | |
| Grade I: normal | 12 |
| Grade II: nearly normal | 11–8 |
| Grade III: abnormal | 7–4 |
| Grade IV: severely abnormal | 3–1 |
Fig. 2Macroscopic appearance of a defect treated with microfracture technique 12 months after surgery. Partial filling of the defect by a thin healing tissue can be observed.
Fig. 3Macroscopic appearance of a defect treated with nanofracture technique 12 months after surgery. The defect is almost completely covered by a newly formed tissue that is similar to the native cartilage. Furthermore, the repair tissue shows a good integration with the surrounding cartilage and lack of fibrillation and fissures on the majority of the surface.
Fig. 4Histological evaluation of a defect treated with microfracture technique 12 months after surgery. Repair tissue does not show the normal structure consisting of cartilage layers and is characterized by an almost complete lack of tidemark and a severe alteration of the subchondral bone architecture.
Fig. 5Histological evaluation of a defect treated with nanofracture technique 12 months after surgery. Satisfactory defect filling and restoration of the structural cartilage architecture can be observed.
Fig. 6Immunohistochemical evaluation of a defect treated with microfracture technique 12 months after surgery. The defect is filled with fibrocartilage tissue, with poor immunofluorescence positivity for type II collagen.
Fig. 7Immunohistochemical evaluation of a defect treated with nanofracture technique 12 months after surgery. ( A ) The defect is completely filled by fibrohyaline repair tissue strongly positive to immunohistochemistry for type II collagen. ( B ) Strong positivity in correspondence of the channels can be observed. ( C ) Clones of regenerating chondrocytes are present around the area that correspond to increased collagen type II synthesis.