Gelse Kolja, Angele Peter, Behrens Peter, Brucker Peter U, Fay Jakob, Günther Daniel, Kreuz Peter, Lützner Jörg, Madry Henning, Müller Peter E, Niemeyer Philipp, Pagenstert Geert, Tischer Thomas, Walther Markus, Zinser Wolfgang, Spahn Gunter
Abteilung für Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen.
Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Regensburg.
Z Orthop Unfall. 2018 Aug;156(4):423-435. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-101470. Epub 2018 Mar 9.
In clinical practice, there is still no definite treatment algorithm for focal, partial thickness cartilage lesions (grade II - III). It is well-established that debridement (shaving/lavage) of large degenerative cartilage lesions is not recommended, but there is no such recommendation in the case of focal, partial thickness cartilage defects.
The scientific rationale of cartilage shaving and joint lavage was investigated and a systematic analysis was performed of the literature on the clinical effect of cartilage debridement. Furthermore, a consensus statement on this issue was developed by the working group on Clinical Tissue Regeneration of the German Society of Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).
The therapeutic approach is different for asymptomatic lesions with biomechanical stable residual cartilage tissue and clinically symptomatic defects with unstable fragments. The benefit of a joint lavage or surface smoothening of focal partial thickness has not been proved. Even more importantly, the mechanical or thermal resection of cartilage tissue even induces a zone of necrosis in adjacent cartilage, and thus leads to additional injury. Therefore, large scale smoothening (shaving) of clinically asymptomatic, fibrillated or irregular cartilage defects should not be performed. However, if there are clinical symptoms, resection of unstable and delaminated cartilage fragments may be reasonable, as it can reduce harmful shear tension in residual tissue. This can help to brake the progression of the damage and avoid formation of free bodies.
The decision criteria for debridement of partial thickness focal cartilage lesions are multifactorial and include the clinical symptoms, the size and the degree of the defect, the stability of remaining cartilage, localisation of the defect, and individual patient-specific parameters. Debridement is not recommended for asymptomatic lesions, but may be reasonable for symptomatic cases with unstable tissue.
在临床实践中,对于局限性、部分厚度软骨损伤(II-III级)仍没有明确的治疗方案。众所周知,不建议对大面积退行性软骨损伤进行清创术(刨削/灌洗),但对于局限性、部分厚度软骨缺损则没有此类建议。
研究了软骨刨削和关节灌洗的科学原理,并对关于软骨清创术临床效果的文献进行了系统分析。此外,德国骨科与创伤学会(DGOU)临床组织再生工作组就该问题制定了一份共识声明。
对于具有生物力学稳定残余软骨组织的无症状损伤和具有不稳定碎片的临床症状性缺损,治疗方法有所不同。关节灌洗或局限性部分厚度表面平滑处理的益处尚未得到证实。更重要的是,软骨组织的机械或热切除甚至会在相邻软骨中诱发坏死区域,从而导致额外损伤。因此,不应对临床无症状的、纤维化或不规则的软骨缺损进行大规模平滑处理(刨削)。然而,如果存在临床症状,切除不稳定和分层的软骨碎片可能是合理的,因为这可以降低残余组织中的有害剪切张力。这有助于阻止损伤的进展并避免游离体的形成。
局限性部分厚度软骨损伤清创术的决策标准是多因素的,包括临床症状、缺损的大小和程度、剩余软骨的稳定性、缺损的位置以及个体患者特定参数。对于无症状损伤不建议进行清创术,但对于组织不稳定的有症状病例可能是合理的。