Abstract
Category:
Ankle, Arthroscopy, Sports
Introduction/Purpose:
Microfracture (MF) remains a dominant treatment strategy for symptomatic osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT). Micronized cartilage allograft (BioCartilage) is a biologic scaffold and is utilized for MF augmentation to improve the quality for cartilage regeneration. However, there is still lack of evidence on efficacy of BioCartilage as an adjunct to MF, as no comparative studies have been reported to date. The purpose of this study is to clarify the effectiveness of BioCartilage as an adjuvant to MF compared to MF alone in the treatment of OLT.
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study comparing patients treated with MF with BioCartilage and MF alone between 2014 and 2017 was undertaken. Patients with a minimum follow-up time of 12 months were included. All patients received concentrated bone marrow aspirate injection at the time of surgery. Clinical outcome was evaluated with the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) pre- and postoperatively. Postoperative MRIs were evaluated using a modified Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Tissue (MOCART) score. Comparisons between groups were made with the Man-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the Chi-squared test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables.
Results:
Twenty-four patients underwent MF with BioCartilage (MF-BC group) and 24 patients underwent MF alone (MF group). The mean age was 40.8 years in MF-BC group and 47.8 years in MF group (p=0.068). The mean follow-up time was 19.2 months in MF-BC group and 24.5 months in MF group (p=0.042). Both groups showed significant improvements in all FAOS subscales. No significant differences between groups were found in postoperative FAOS subscales including symptoms, pain, daily activities, sports activities and quality of life (MF-BC; 72.8, 77.8, 87.4, 60.8, 56.6, MF; 73.3, 79.3, 86.0, 60.9, 60.6, respectively, p>0.05). The mean MOCART score in MF-BC group was higher (73.2vs64.1), but not statistically significant (p=0.315). When assessing each MOCART parameter individually, MF-BC group had significant better infill in the defect (p=0.028).
Conclusion:
MF with BioCartilage is an effective treatment strategy for the treatment of OLT and results in similar functional outcomes compared with MF alone in the short-term. However, MF with BioCartilage provides better cartilage infill in the defect on MRI. This finding suggests that the repair seen in a cartilage defect treated with BioCartilage augmentation may be superior to treatment with MF alone. Further long-term follow-up studies are warranted.