SARIS, Daniel, Andrew PRICE, Wojciech WIDUCHOWSKI, Marion BERTRAND-MARCHAND, Jacob CARON, Jon Olav DROGSET, Pieter EMANS, Ales PODSKUBKA, Anika TSUCHIDA, Sven KILI, David LEVINE, Mats BRITTBERG, Libor PAŠA, Tomas TRC, Konrad SLYNARSKI, Bernd-Jan SANSON and Mauritz BEZUIDENHOUDT. Matrix-Applied Characterized Autologous Cultured Chondrocytes Versus Microfracture Two-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial (Matrix-Applied Characterized Autologous Cultured Chondrocytes Versus Microfracture: Two-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial.). The American Journal of Sports Medicine. Chicago: Thomson Reuters, 2014, vol. 42, No 6, p. 1384-1394. ISSN 0363-5465. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546514528093.
Other formats:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Basic information
Original name Matrix-Applied Characterized Autologous Cultured Chondrocytes Versus Microfracture Two-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Randomized Trial
Name in Czech MACI autologní kultivované chondrocytry versus microfrature - dvouleté výsleky prospektivní randomizoévané studie
Authors SARIS, Daniel (528 Netherlands), Andrew PRICE (826 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Wojciech WIDUCHOWSKI (616 Poland), Marion BERTRAND-MARCHAND (250 France), Jacob CARON (528 Netherlands), Jon Olav DROGSET (578 Norway), Pieter EMANS (528 Netherlands), Ales PODSKUBKA (203 Czech Republic), Anika TSUCHIDA (528 Netherlands), Sven KILI (826 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), David LEVINE (840 United States of America), Mats BRITTBERG (752 Sweden), Libor PAŠA (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution), Tomas TRC (203 Czech Republic), Konrad SLYNARSKI (616 Poland), Bernd-Jan SANSON (528 Netherlands) and Mauritz BEZUIDENHOUDT (528 Netherlands).
Edition The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Chicago, Thomson Reuters, 2014, 0363-5465.
Other information
Original language English
Type of outcome Article in a journal
Field of Study 30211 Orthopaedics
Country of publisher United States of America
Confidentiality degree is not subject to a state or trade secret
WWW URL
Impact factor Impact factor: 4.362
RIV identification code RIV/00216224:14110/14:00077193
Organization unit Faculty of Medicine
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546514528093
UT WoS 000340721400023
Keywords (in Czech) chrupavka; autologní transplantace na nosiči microfracture
Keywords in English cartilage repair; clinical outcomes; knee; matrix-applied characterized autologous cultured chondrocytes (MACI) implant; microfracture
Tags EL OK
Tags International impact, Reviewed
Changed by Changed by: Soňa Böhmová, učo 232884. Changed: 8/1/2015 12:58.
Abstract
Background: Randomized controlled trials studying the efficacy and safety of matrix-applied characterized autologous cultured chondrocytes (MACI) versus microfracture (MFX) for treating cartilage defects are limited. Purpose: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of MACI versus MFX in the treatment of patients with symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee. Study Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Patients enrolled in the SUMMIT (Demonstrate the Superiority of MACI implant to Microfracture Treatment) trial had >= 1 symptomatic focal cartilage defect (Outerbridge grade III or IV; >= 3 cm(2)) of the femoral condyles or trochlea, with a baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain value <55. The co-primary efficacy endpoint was the change in the KOOS pain and function subscores from baseline to 2 years. Histological evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessments of structural repair tissue, treatment failure, the remaining 3 KOOS subscales, and safety were also assessed. Results: Of the 144 patients treated, 137 (95%) completed the 2-year assessment. Patients had a mean age of 33.8 years and a mean lesion size of 4.8 cm(2). The mean KOOS pain and function subscores from baseline to 2 years were significantly more improved with MACI than with MFX (pain: MACI, 37.0 to 82.5 vs MFX, 35.5 to 70.9; function: MACI, 14.9 to 60.9 vs MFX, 12.6 to 48.7; P = .001). A significant improvement in scores was also observed on the KOOS subscales of activities of daily living (MACI, 43.5 to 87.2 vs MFX, 42.6 to 75.8; P < .001), knee-related quality of life (MACI, 18.8 to 56.2 vs MFX, 17.2 to 47.3; P = .029), and other symptoms (MACI, 48.3 to 83.7 vs MFX, 44.4 to 72.2; P < .001) for patients treated with MACI compared with MFX. Repair tissue quality was good as assessed by histology/MRI, but no difference was shown between treatments. A low number of treatment failures (nonresponders: MACI, 12.5% vs MFX, 31.9%; P = .016) and no unexpected safety findings were reported. Conclusion: The treatment of symptomatic cartilage knee defects >= 3 cm(2) in size using MACI was clinically and statistically significantly better than with MFX, with similar structural repair tissue and safety, in this heterogeneous patient population. Moreover, MACI offers a more efficacious alternative than MFX with a similar safety profile for the treatment of symptomatic articular cartilage defects of the knee.
PrintDisplayed: 1/10/2024 12:41