Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of combined Arthroscopic Microfracture and Mesenchymal Stem Cell Injection Versus Isolated Microfracture for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery Pub Date : 2024-09-07 DOI:10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.011
Michele Mercurio, Roberto Minici, Giovanna Spina, Erminia Cofano, Domenico Laganà, Filippo Familiari, Olimpio Galasso, Giorgio Gasparini
{"title":"Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of combined Arthroscopic Microfracture and Mesenchymal Stem Cell Injection Versus Isolated Microfracture for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.","authors":"Michele Mercurio, Roberto Minici, Giovanna Spina, Erminia Cofano, Domenico Laganà, Filippo Familiari, Olimpio Galasso, Giorgio Gasparini","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to systematically evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes reported in comparative studies evaluating combined arthroscopic microfracture and mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) injection versus isolated microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT). A total of 5 studies were included. Demographics, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, Tegner activity scale score, Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale (FAOS), visual analogue scale (VAS), and Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue Score (MOCART) were analyzed. A total of 348 patients were evaluated, 171 of whom underwent combined microfracture and MSC injection and 177 of whom underwent isolated microfracture. The frequency-weighted mean ages were 38.9 ± 13.5 and 36.9 ± 11.4 years and the mean follow-up were 36.7 ± 13.3 and 36.2 ± 16.2 months in the combined microfracture and MSC injection and isolated microfracture groups, respectively. The combined microfracture and MSC injection group showed significantly better postoperative AOFAS score (81.5 ± 7.4 vs 68.2 ± 5.1, p < .001), and MOCART score (74.3 ± 16.3 vs 63.9 ± 15.5, p < .001) with differences beyond the minimum clinically important difference. The combination of arthroscopic microfracture and MSC injection significantly improved functionality and radiological outcomes compared to those of isolated microfracture for OLT.</p>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to systematically evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes reported in comparative studies evaluating combined arthroscopic microfracture and mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) injection versus isolated microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT). A total of 5 studies were included. Demographics, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, Tegner activity scale score, Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale (FAOS), visual analogue scale (VAS), and Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue Score (MOCART) were analyzed. A total of 348 patients were evaluated, 171 of whom underwent combined microfracture and MSC injection and 177 of whom underwent isolated microfracture. The frequency-weighted mean ages were 38.9 ± 13.5 and 36.9 ± 11.4 years and the mean follow-up were 36.7 ± 13.3 and 36.2 ± 16.2 months in the combined microfracture and MSC injection and isolated microfracture groups, respectively. The combined microfracture and MSC injection group showed significantly better postoperative AOFAS score (81.5 ± 7.4 vs 68.2 ± 5.1, p < .001), and MOCART score (74.3 ± 16.3 vs 63.9 ± 15.5, p < .001) with differences beyond the minimum clinically important difference. The combination of arthroscopic microfracture and MSC injection significantly improved functionality and radiological outcomes compared to those of isolated microfracture for OLT.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关节镜下微骨折和间充质干细胞注射联合治疗与单独微骨折治疗距骨软骨损伤的临床和放射学疗效对比:比较研究荟萃分析。
我们的目的是系统地评估关节镜下联合微骨折和间充质干细胞(MSC)注射与单独微骨折治疗距骨软骨损伤(OLT)的对比研究中报告的临床和放射学结果。共纳入 5 项研究。对人口统计学、美国骨科足踝协会(AOFAS)评分、Tegner活动量表评分、足踝结果量表(FAOS)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和软骨修复组织磁共振观察评分(MOCART)进行了分析。共对 348 名患者进行了评估,其中 171 人接受了微骨折和间充质干细胞注射联合治疗,177 人接受了孤立微骨折治疗。联合微骨折和间充质干细胞注射组和孤立微骨折组的频率加权平均年龄分别为(38.9 ± 13.5)岁和(36.9 ± 11.4)岁,平均随访时间分别为(36.7 ± 13.3)个月和(36.2 ± 16.2)个月。联合微骨折和间充质干细胞注射组的术后 AOFAS 评分明显更高(81.5 ± 7.4 vs 68.2 ± 5.1,P<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
234
审稿时长
29.8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.
期刊最新文献
Outcomes of naviculocuneiform arthrodesis with and without adjunct arthrodesis. Concomitant osteochondral lesion of the talus in ankle instability: Utilizing clinical presentation to guide imaging decision. Diabetic Foot Infection Severity as a Predictor of Re-ulceration Following Partial Forefoot Amputation. Predictive factors to return to sport after surgical management of ankle fractures. Reply to: EVALUATION OF THE HEALING STATUS OF LATERAL ANKLE LIGAMENTS SIX WEEKS AFTER AN ACUTE ANKLE SPRAIN.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1