Failure of Bone Marrow Stimulation Techniques
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
REVIEW ARTICLE Failure of Bone Marrow Stimulation Techniques Rachel M. Frank, MD,* Eric J. Cotter, BS,* Islam Nassar, MBBCh, M.Ch (orth), MBA, MHA,w and Brian Cole, MD, MBA* to prevent further joint deterioration. The limitations in Abstract: Marrow stimulation techniques, including microfracture, intrinsic articular cartilage physiology and regeneration has are among the most commonly performed cartilage restoration led to an influx of research into surgical cartilage restora- procedures for symptomatic chondral defects of the knee. For the tion techniques. vast majority of patients, marrow stimulation results in reduced There are numerous surgical options available for the pain and improved function, providing overall satisfactory out- comes. In some cases, however, marrow stimulation fails, resulting treatment of focal chondral defects, which can be broadly in symptom recurrence and often, the need for repeat surgery. This categorized into 4 groups: palliative options, including review will describe the indications and outcomes of microfracture arthroscopic debridement and lavage; reparative options, as a primary surgical treatment for focal chondral defects of the including microfracture and other bone marrow stimulation knee, identify patient and procedure-specific factors associated with techniques; restorative options including osteochondral poor clinical outcomes, and will discuss treatment options and their autograft transfer (OATS) and autologous chondrocyte respective outcomes for patients with a failed prior microfracture implantation (ACI) procedures; and reconstructive options surgery. including osteochondral allograft transplantation.9 Regard- Key Words: cartilage restoration, microfracture failure, marrow less of the specific technique chosen, the goals of surgical stimulation failure, autologous chondrocyte implantation, osteo- treatment are similar, including the ability to improve joint chondral allograft transplantation function, relieve pain, and allow patients to return to activity or in the case of athletes, return to sport. The appropriate (Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2017;25:2–9) treatment decision for any given patient presenting with a symptomatic cartilage defect of the knee must be made on a case-by-case basis, and certainly, several defect-specific and ature articular cartilage is relatively avascular and patient-specific factors will aid in clinical decision-making. Maneural, composed of predominantly type II collagen Specifically, the size and location of the lesion, the activity mixed with proteoglycans and relatively few cells. Without level of the patient, the expectations and goals of the patient, vascularity, articular cartilage is dependent on diffusion to prior surgical/treatment history, body mass index, and other obtain nutrients and oxygen, making intrinsic repair of concomitant knee pathologies are all considerations in articular cartilage defects exceedingly difficult in vivo.1 determining which procedure is best for each patient.9 Focal cartilage defects of the knee are relatively common, Bone marrow stimulation techniques were first descri- found in over 60% of patients undergoing arthroscopy of bed by Pridie,10 who demonstrated that drilling subchondral the knee.2,3 It has been estimated that cartilage injuries of bone could stimulate bone marrow substrates to repopulate the knee affect approximately 900,000 Americans annually, articular cartilage defects, a technique that was later termed resulting in >200,000 surgical procedures.4 Regardless of spongialization by Ficat et al.11 Building on the concept of whether the defect is acute, chronic, or degenerative in drilling, Johnson12,13 first described abrasion arthroplasty nature, articular cartilage has not demonstrated quality where one performs multiple tissue debridement including spontaneous healing.5–8 When left untreated, focal chon- surgical penetration through subchondral bone to enhance dral lesions, particularly those involving the weight-bearing bleeding to create a repair response. These early techniques surfaces of the medial or lateral compartments as well as eventually gave rise to microfracture, which was popularized those involving the patellofemoral joint, can result to pain, by Steadman et al14 and is now considered the gold standard effusions, mechanical symptoms, and low levels of function. surgical procedure for small, isolated, articular cartilage For appropriately indicated patients, surgical intervention defects of the knee. Microfracture has gained popularity as for symptomatic cartilage lesions is not only helpful in it is a minimally invasive, single-stage, low-cost, and rela- reducing these symptoms, but also, is needed to restore near tively straightforward surgical procedure (Fig. 1).15 Micro- normal joint mechanics and congruence, and in some cases, fracture and other marrow stimulation techniques induce an influx of marrow substrates to repopulate the cartilage defect by removing the subchondral bone and exposing From the *Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University 16 Medical Center, Chicago, IL; and wEl-Hadara University Hospital, cancellous bone. This results in clot formation with mar- Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. row elements that is remodeled and organized into a fibro- Disclosure: Brian Cole receives research support from Aesculap/ cartilage plug, comprised primary of type I collagen. B.Braun, Arthrex, Cytori, Medipost, Pssur, Smith & Nephew, Tornier, and Zimmer; is a paid consultant for Arthrex, Regentis, Although fibrocartilage is superior to no cartilage, the long- and Zimmer; receives royalties from Arthrex, DJ Orthopaedics, term efficacy of microfracture has been called into question Elsevier, Saunders/MosbyElsevier, and SLACK Inc; and has stock/ due to the lack of true, articular, hyaline-type cartilage fill- stock options in Carticept and Regentis. The other authors have no ing the void. Fibrocartilage repair tissue lacks many of the conflict of interest to declare. Reprints: Brian Cole, MD, MBA, Rush University Medical Center, intrinsic biochemical and viscoelastic properties of normal 1611 W Harrison St, Suite 300 Chicago, IL 60612. hyaline cartilage. As a result of its biochemical and viscoe- Copyright r 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. lastic properties, fibrocartilage is more stiff compared with 2 | www.sportsmedarthro.com Sports Med Arthrosc Rev Volume 25, Number 1, March 2017 Copyright r 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev Volume 25, Number 1, March 2017 Failure of Bone Marrow Stimulation Techniques FIGURE 1. Intraoperative arthroscopic photographs demonstrating the use of the microfracture procedure to a 1.8 cmÂ1.8 m lesion of the weight-bearing portion of the lateral femoral condyle in a 24-year-old woman. articular hyaline cartilage, which does not afford it the same function was consistently improved in the first 24 months shock absorption and force distribution capabilities seen in after microfracture. Specifically, at 2-year, patient-reported normal hyaline cartilage.10,17–19 The remainder of this outcomes (PROs) were improved compared with pre- review will describe the indications and outcomes of operative scores; however, only 67% to 85% of patients microfracture as a primary surgical treatment for focal continued to report improved outcomes between 2 and 5 chondral defects of the knee, identify patient and procedure- years postoperatively. In a more recent systematic review specific factors associated with poor clinical outcomes, and only of level I and II studies, Goyal et al23 confirmed the will discuss treatment options and their respective outcomes factors described by Mithoefer et al.22 However, Goyal for patients with a failed prior microfracture surgery. et al23 noted progression to osteoarthritis was observed frequently in patients who received microfracture for lesions > 4 cm2 just 5 years after the procedure. Other authors have demonstrated successful outcomes following INDICATIONS AND OUTCOMES microfracture for lesions > 4 cm2; however, that improve- Marrow stimulation techniques, including micro- ment has not been shown to last as long as for smaller fracture, are among the most commonly performed carti- lesions, which may explain why many surgeons reserve the lage restoration procedures in the United States for use of microfracture for isolated lesions < 4 cm2.22,24 symptomatic chondral defects of the knee.20 These techni- Finally, microfracture typically has better outcomes used as ques are indicated for patients with symptomatic, full- a first-line treatment, as opposed to when it is performed as thickness, isolated chondral defects.21 Numerous authors a revision operation.25–27 have nicely delineated which patients may benefit most For patients with symptomatic chondral defects of the from microfracture, while also reporting on possible neg- knee, often, concomitant knee pathology may be present, ative prognostic factors. In a systematic review of 28 studies including meniscal deficiency, coronal or sagittal plane with over 3000 patients, Mithoefer et al22 reported patient malalignment, and/or ligamentous instability.21 Such con- age above 40 years, preoperative symptomatic intervals comitant knee pathology may actually contribute to the <12 months, lesion sizer4cm2 for nonathletes and < 2 development of focal cartilage defects, as any combination of cm2 for athletes, and body mass index < 30 kg/m2 were meniscal deficiency, malalignment, and ligamentous insuffi- associated with better outcomes. Overall