Microfracture technique versus carbon fibre rod implantation for treatment of knee articular cartilage lesions.

PURPOSE

To compare the microfracture technique with carbon fibre rod implantation for treatment of knee articular cartilage lesions.

METHODS

10 men and 30 women aged 22 to 56 (mean, 37.4) years underwent microfracture (n=20) or carbon fibre rod implantation (n=20) for International Cartilage Repair Society grade 3 to 4 knee articular cartilage lesions after a mean of 12.2 months of viscosupplementation and physiotherapy. Clinical outcome at 6 and 12 months was assessed using the Tegner-Lysholm score and modified Cincinnati score. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcome at 12 months was assessed by a radiologist. The modified magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) score was evaluated.

RESULTS

The 2 groups were comparable in terms of age, body mass index, lesion location, lesion size, duration of symptoms, and coexisting pathology. The microfracture group had a higher preoperative Tegner-Lysholm score (39.4±7.3 vs. 34.4±4.9, p=0.015) and modified Cincinnati score (36.4±7.2 vs. 30.4±4.0, p=0.002) than the carbon fibre rod group. At 12 months, change in both scores was significant within each group (p<0.001) and was higher in the microfracture than carbon fibre rod group (p<0.001). MRI showed minimal regenerative tissue. Lobulation, oedema, and hypertrophy were more commonly found in the regeneration tissue after carbon fibre rod implantation than microfracture. At 12 months, the MOCART score was higher in the microfracture than carbon fibre rod group (59 vs. 47, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Microfracture is superior to carbon fibre rod implantation in terms of clinical and radiological outcome.