Gilbert J E
Dept of Orthopedic Surgery, Baylor University Medical Ctr, Dallas, TX 75246, USA.
Am J Knee Surg. 1998 Winter;11(1):42-6.
Over the past several decades, much has been learned about articular cartilage and its physiological capacity to restore itself. While articular cartilage does appear to have some regenerative capabilities, it appears to lose this capacity over a period of time, making restoration of articular surfaces more and more difficult. To date, no technique has been completely successful in achieving exactly normal regenerative articular cartilage. Arthroscopic lavage and debridement provides temporary relief of symptoms. This probably works by removing degradative enzymes that contribute to synovitis and also to the further breakdown of articular cartilage. Bone marrow stimulation techniques such as abrasion arthroplasty, drilling, and microfracture produce only fibrocartilage and therefore do not offer a long-term cure. Perichondral and periosteal interposition grafts produce repair tissue that is similar to hyaline cartilage but also lack the mechanical durability. Like bone marrow stimulation techniques, interposition grafts introduce precursor cells, which have a tendency to differentiate along lines other than cartilage. This leads to an inferior quality of repair tissue. Currently, chondrogenic-stimulating factors and artificial matrices are currently being researched and developed. Much has been learned about the various growth factors that stimulate chondrocyte differentiation and extracellular matrix production, but to date, there has not been a clinical technique that has shown any long-term promise. Ultimately, the goal will be to take precursor cells from an easily accessible source such as the iliac crest, mix them with growth factors that have been derived genetically in the lab, and provide an artificial matrix that in combination can produce restoration of articular cartilage at minimal cost and patient morbidity. Autologous osteochondral transplant systems have shown encouraging results but there are still problems. Graft matching and contouring to the recipient articular surface is difficult. Donor sites can be a limiting factor. Furthermore, the fibrocartilaginous interface between the donor and recipient site may contribute to breakdown in the long run. Autologous chondrocyte implantation is a biological repair process that also has shown encouraging results. It must be remembered that this is not normal articular cartilage--it is only hyaline-like cartilage. The technique is expensive and is technically difficult to perform. There are no randomized prospective studies that compare the natural history of the repair tissue to that of other forms of repair tissue. Long-term functional outcome is still a significant question mark. In addition, it has not been shown that autologous chondrocyte implantation can prevent degenerative changes. In the future, we probably will see delivery systems using stimulating growth factors, chondrocytes, and synthetically derived matrices. When placed in combination and with the right mechanical stimuli, we may ultimately achieve true restoration of articular cartilage.
在过去几十年里,人们对关节软骨及其自我修复的生理能力有了很多了解。虽然关节软骨似乎确实具有一定的再生能力,但随着时间的推移,这种能力似乎会丧失,使得关节表面的修复变得越来越困难。迄今为止,还没有一种技术能完全成功地实现完全正常的再生关节软骨。关节镜冲洗和清创术能暂时缓解症状。这可能是通过去除导致滑膜炎以及关节软骨进一步分解的降解酶来起作用的。骨髓刺激技术,如磨削关节成形术、钻孔和微骨折,只能产生纤维软骨,因此无法提供长期治愈效果。软骨膜和骨膜植入移植产生的修复组织类似于透明软骨,但也缺乏机械耐久性。与骨髓刺激技术一样,植入移植引入了前体细胞,这些前体细胞有沿着软骨以外的方向分化的倾向。这导致修复组织质量较差。目前,促软骨生成因子和人工基质正在研究和开发中。人们对刺激软骨细胞分化和细胞外基质产生的各种生长因子有了很多了解,但迄今为止,还没有一种临床技术显示出任何长期前景。最终目标将是从易于获取的来源,如髂嵴获取前体细胞,将它们与在实验室通过基因手段获得的生长因子混合,并提供一种人工基质,它们结合起来能够以最低的成本和患者发病率实现关节软骨的修复。自体骨软骨移植系统已显示出令人鼓舞的结果,但仍存在问题。将移植体与受体关节表面进行匹配和塑形很困难。供体部位可能是一个限制因素。此外,从长远来看,供体和受体部位之间的纤维软骨界面可能会导致组织破坏。自体软骨细胞植入是一种生物修复过程,也已显示出令人鼓舞的结果。必须记住,这不是正常关节软骨——只是类似透明软骨的组织。该技术昂贵且操作技术难度大。没有随机前瞻性研究将修复组织的自然病程与其他形式的修复组织进行比较。长期功能结果仍然是一个重大问号。此外,尚未证明自体软骨细胞植入能预防退行性改变。未来,我们可能会看到使用刺激生长因子、软骨细胞和合成衍生基质的递送系统。当它们结合并受到合适的机械刺激时,我们最终可能实现关节软骨的真正修复。