基于文石相的骨支架与微骨折术和清创术治疗膝关节软骨和骨软骨病变的比较:一项多中心随机对照试验的结果。
Aragonite-Based Scaffold Versus Microfracture and Debridement for the Treatment of Knee Chondral and Osteochondral Lesions: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.
机构信息
Cartiheal Ltd, Kfar Saba, Israel.
Lennox Hill Hospital-Northwell Health Orthopedic Institute, New York, New York, USA.
出版信息
Am J Sports Med. 2023 Mar;51(4):957-967. doi: 10.1177/03635465231151252. Epub 2023 Feb 13.
BACKGROUND
Lesions of the articular cartilage, with or without involvement of the subchondral bone, are a common cause of pain and dysfunction in the knee. Although several treatment options have been developed, the majority of previous clinical trials examined patients with isolated or focal midsized defects, which rarely represent the condition found in the general population. Rather, cartilage lesions are often associated with the presence of mild to moderate osteoarthritic changes.
PURPOSE
The present multicenter randomized controlled trial compared the clinical and radiographic outcomes of an aragonite-based osteochondral implant with a control group (arthroscopic debridement/microfractures) in patients affected by joint surface lesions of the knee, including those with concurrent mild to moderate osteoarthritis.
STUDY DESIGN
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
METHODS
A total of 251 patients were enrolled in 26 medical centers according to the following criteria: age 21 to 75 years, up to 3 cartilage defects of International Cartilage Regeneration & Joint Preservation Society grade 3a or above located on the femoral condyles and/or trochlea, total treatable area from 1 to 7 cm, bony defect depth ≤8 mm, and knee osteoarthritis grade 0 to 3 according to Kellgren-Lawrence score. Patients were randomized to the aragonite-based implant or debridement/microfracture control arm in a 2:1 ratio. Evaluation was performed at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months based on overall Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) as the primary endpoint, and the KOOS subscales (Pain, Quality of Life, Activities of Daily Living), percentage of responders, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score as the secondary endpoints. Patients also underwent magnetic resonance imaging evaluation at 12 and 24 months to assess defect fill grade. Failures (ie, need for any secondary treatment) and adverse events were also recorded.
RESULTS
The implant group showed a statistically superior outcome in the primary endpoint and all secondary endpoints at each follow-up. The magnitude of improvement in the implant group was twice as large as that in the control group in terms of mean KOOS improvement at 2 years. Responder rate (defined as at least a 30-point improvement in overall KOOS) was 77.8% in the implant group as opposed to 33.6% in the control ( < .0001). Statistically superior results were seen in the IKDC score as well. At 24 months, 88.5% of the implanted group had at least 75% defect fill on magnetic resonance imaging as compared with 30.9% of controls ( < .0001). The failure rate was 7.2% for the implant group versus 21.4% for control.
CONCLUSION
This aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral lesions in the knee, including patients with mild to moderate osteoarthritis, and provided superior outcomes as compared with the control group.
REGISTRATION
NCT03299959 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).
背景
关节软骨损伤,无论是否累及软骨下骨,是膝关节疼痛和功能障碍的常见原因。尽管已经开发了几种治疗选择,但以前的大多数临床试验都检查了患有孤立或局灶性中型缺陷的患者,这些患者很少代表一般人群中的情况。相反,软骨损伤通常与轻度至中度骨关节炎的存在有关。
目的
本多中心随机对照试验比较了基于文石的骨软骨植入物与对照组(关节镜下清创/微骨折)在膝关节关节面病变患者中的临床和影像学结果,包括伴有轻度至中度骨关节炎的患者。
研究设计
随机对照试验;证据水平,1 级。
方法
根据以下标准,共有 251 名患者在 26 个医疗中心入组:年龄 21 至 75 岁,股骨髁和/或滑车有 3 个国际软骨再生和关节保护协会 3a 级或以上的软骨缺损,总面积为 1 至 7cm,骨缺损深度≤8mm,根据 Kellgren-Lawrence 评分,膝关节骨关节炎 0 至 3 级。患者按照 2:1 的比例随机分配到基于文石的植入物或清创/微骨折对照组。根据总膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(KOOS)作为主要终点,以及 KOOS 亚量表(疼痛、生活质量、日常生活活动)、应答率和国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)主观评分作为次要终点,在 6、12、18 和 24 个月进行评估。患者还在 12 和 24 个月时进行磁共振成像评估,以评估缺陷填充等级。记录失败(即需要任何二次治疗)和不良事件。
结果
植入组在每个随访时间的主要终点和所有次要终点的结果均具有统计学优势。植入组在 2 年时的 KOOS 改善均值方面的改善幅度是对照组的两倍。植入组的应答率(定义为 KOOS 总体改善至少 30 分)为 77.8%,而对照组为 33.6%(<.0001)。IKDC 评分也显示出统计学上的优势。在 24 个月时,植入组中有 88.5%的患者在磁共振成像上至少有 75%的缺陷填充,而对照组为 30.9%(<.0001)。植入组的失败率为 7.2%,对照组为 21.4%。
结论
这种基于文石的支架在治疗膝关节的软骨和软骨下骨病变方面是安全有效的,包括轻度至中度骨关节炎患者,并提供了比对照组更优的结果。
登记
NCT03299959(ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符)。