Background: Current diagnostic strategies for detection of structural articular cartilage abnormalities, the earliest structural signs of osteoarthritis, often do not capture the condition until it is too far advanced for the most potential benefit of noninvasive interventions.
Purpose: To systematically review the literature relative to the following questions: (1) Is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable instrument to identify knee articular cartilage abnormalities compared with arthroscopy? (2) Is MRI a sensitive tool that can be utilized to identify early cartilage degeneration?
Study Design: Systematic review.
Methods: A systematic search was performed in November 2010 using PubMed MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), SPORTDiscus (from 1985), SCOPUS (from 1996), and EMBASE (from 1974) databases.
Results: Fourteen level I and 13 level II studies were identified that met inclusion criteria and provided information related to diagnostic performance of MRI compared with arthroscopic evaluation. The diagnostic performance of MRI demonstrated a large range of sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies. The sensitivity for identifying articular cartilage abnormalities in the knee joint was reported between 26% and 96%. Specificity and accuracy were reported between 50% and 100% and between 49% and 94%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for identifying early osteoarthritis were reported between 0% and 86%, 48% and 95%, and 5% and 94%, respectively. As a result of inconsistencies between imaging techniques and methodological shortcomings of many of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed, and it was difficult to fully synthesize the information to state firm conclusions about the diagnostic performance of MRI.
Conclusion: There is evidence in some MRI protocols that MRI is a relatively valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable clinical tool for identifying articular cartilage degeneration. Because of heterogeneity of MRI sequences, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions regarding its global clinical utility for guiding diagnosis and treatment strategies.
Clinical Relevance: Traumatic sports injuries to the knee may be significant precursor events to early onset of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Magnetic resonance imaging may aid in early identification of structural injuries to articular cartilage as evidenced by articular cartilage degeneration grading.
Background: There are currently several approaches being pursued to treat focal defects of articular cartilage, each having specific advantages or challenges. A single-stage procedure that uses autologous cartilage fragments, Cartilage Autograft Implantation System (CAIS), is being evaluated in patients and may offer a clinically effective option.
Purpose: To establish the safety of CAIS and to test whether CAIS improves quality of life by using standardized outcomes assessment tools.
Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.
Methods: Patients (n = 29) were randomized (1:2) with the intent to treat with either a control (microfracture [MFX]) or an experimental (CAIS) procedure. Patients were followed at predetermined time points for 2 years using several standardized outcomes assessment tools (SF-36, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]). Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at baseline, 3 weeks, and 6, 12, and 24 months.
Results: Lesion size and International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade were similar in both groups. General outcome measures (eg, physical component score of the SF-36) indicated an overall improvement in both groups, and no differences in the number of adverse effects were noted in comparisons between the CAIS and MFX groups. The IKDC score of the CAIS group was significantly higher (73.9 ± 14.72 at 12 months and 82.95 ± 14.88 at 24 months) compared with the MFX group (57.78 ± 18.31 at 12 months and 59.5 ± 13.44 at 24 months). Select subdomains (4/5) in the KOOS instrument were significantly different at 12 and 18 months, and all subdomains (Symptoms and Stiffness, Pain, Activities of Daily Living, Sports and Recreation, Knee-related Quality of Life) were significantly increased at 24 months in CAIS with scores of 88.47 ± 11.68, 90.64 ± 7.87, 97.29 ± 3.8, 78.16 ± 22.06, and 69 ± 23.15 compared with 75 ± 9.31, 78.94 ± 13.73, 89.46 ± 8.13, 51.67 ± 26.01, and 37.15 ± 21.67 in the MFX group. These significant improvements were maintained at 24 months in both IKDC and KOOS. Qualitative analysis of the imaging data did not note differences between the 2 groups in fill of the graft bed, tissue integration, or presence of subchondral cysts. Patients treated with MFX had a significantly higher incidence of intralesional osteophyte formation (54% and 70% of total number of lesions treated) at 6 and 12 months when compared with CAIS (8% and 25% of total number of lesions treated).
Conclusion: The first clinical experience in using CAIS for treating patients with focal chondral defects indicates that it is a safe, feasible, and effective method that may improve long-term clinical outcomes.
