Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Autologous chondrocyte implantation.

Authors: T, Minas; R, Chiu;

Autologous chondrocyte implantation.

Abstract

Rationale for the treatment of cartilage damage in younger patients depends on a thorough understanding of the predisposing factors for the chondrosis and the stage of disease. Implantation with autologous cultured chondrocytes allows for resurfacing of larger defect areas with reproducibly good/excellent results in 90% of patients with isolated lesions of the femoral condyle. Patellar lesions also may be successfully treated (approximately 75% improved) but strict attention must be given to correction of malalignment. Results in patients with tibial and salvage lesions are encouraging; however, these results should be viewed with caution due to the small number of patients with 2-year follow-up. Autologous chondrocyte implantation involves an open technique with the inherent disadvantages of adhesions and a more prolonged recovery. However, these disadvantages must be weighed against the procedure's ability to produce a hyaline-type tissue with greater durability than fibrocartilage repairs produced by traditional marrow-stimulation techniques. We recommended matching the treatment procedure to patient expectations and lesion/demographic characteristics. Based on the available literature. algorithms have been published that recommend autologous chondrocyte implantation be reserved as first-line treatment for high-demand patients with large lesions (>2 cm2) and as revision therapy in patients with lesions of all sizes, regardless of patient demand, who have failed alternative marrow stimulation techniques.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Cartilage, Articular, Chondrocytes, Treatment Outcome, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Knee Injuries, Transplantation, Autologous, Algorithms, United States

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!