Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of clinical outcomes between arthroscopic subchondral drilling and microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus

  • Ankle
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

The objectives of this study were to compare the clinical outcomes of the two common bone marrow stimulation techniques such as subchondral drilling and microfracture for symptomatic osteochondral lesions of the talus and to evaluate prognostic factors affecting the outcomes.

Methods

Ninety patients (90 ankles) who underwent arthroscopic bone marrow stimulation for small- to mid-sized osteochondral lesions of the talus constituted the study cohort. The 90 ankles were divided into two groups: a drilling group (40 ankles) and a microfracture group (50 ankles). Each group was matched for age and gender, and both groups had characteristics similar to those obtained from pre-operative demographic data. The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score and the ankle activity score (AAS) were used to compare clinical outcomes, during a mean follow-up period of 43 months.

Results

The median AOFAS scores were 66.0 points (51–80) in drilling group and 66.5 points (45–81) in microfracture group pre-operatively, and these improved to 89.4 points (77–100) and 90.1 points (69–100) at the final follow-up, respectively. The median VAS scores improved at the final follow-up compared with the pre-operative condition. The median AAS for the drilling group improved from 4.5 (1–6) pre-operatively to 6.0 (1–8) at the final follow-up, while those for the microfracture group improved from 3.0 (2–8) to 6.0 (3–9). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the AOFAS scores, VAS, and AAS.

Conclusions

The arthroscopic subchondral drilling and microfracture techniques that were used to stimulate bone marrow showed similar clinical outcomes. The results of this study suggest that both techniques are effective and reliable in treating small- to mid-sized osteochondral lesions of the talus, regardless of which of the two techniques is used.

Level of evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson IF, Crichton KJ, Grattan-Smith T, Cooper RA, Brazier D (1989) Osteochondral fractures of the dome of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:1143–1152

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Angermann P, Jensen P (1989) Osteochondritis dissecans of the talus long-term results of surgical treatment. Foot Ankle Int 10:161–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Baums MH, Heidrich G, Schultz W, Steckel H, Kahl E, Klinger HM (2006) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation for treating cartilage defects of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:303–308

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Becher C, Thermann H (2005) Results of microfracture in the treatment of articular cartilage defects of the talus. Foot Ankle Int 26:583–585

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Berndt AL, Harty M (1959) Transchondral fractures (osteochondritisdissecans) of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 41:988–1020

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brittberg M, Tallheden T, Sjogren-Jansson B, Lindahl A, Peterson L (2001) Autologous chondrocytes used for articular cartilage repair: an update. Clin Orthop Relat Res 391(Suppl):S337–S348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Buckwalter JA, Mankin HJ (1998) Articular cartilage: degeneration and osteoarthritis, repair, regeneration, and transplantation. Instr Course Lect 47:487–504

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Choi WJ, Kim BS, Lee JW (2012) Osteochondral lesion of the talus: could age be an indication for arthroscopic treatment? Am J Sports Med 40(2):419–424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen H, Sun J, Hoemann CD, Lascau-Coman V, Ouyang W, McKee MD, Shive MS, Buschmann MD (2009) Drilling and microfracture lead to different bone structure and necrosis during bone-marrow stimulation for cartilage repair. J Orthop Res 27(11):1432–1438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chuckpaiwong B, Berkson EM, Theodore GH (2008) Microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the ankle: outcome analysis and outcome predictors of 105 cases. Arthroscopy 24:106–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferkel RD, Cheng JC (1999) Ankle and subtalar arthroscopy. In: Kelikian A (ed) Operative Treatment of the Foot and Ankle, 1st edn. Appleton-Croft, New York, pp 321–350

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ferkel RD, Zanotti RM, Komenda GA, Sgaglione NA, Cheng MS, Applegate GR, Dopirak RM (2008) Arthroscopic treatment of chronic osteochondral lesions of the talus: long-term results. Am J Sports Med 36:1750–1762

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Giannini S, Vannini F (2004) Operative treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talar dome: current concepts review. Foot Ankle Int 25:168–175

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gobbi A, Francisco RA, Lubowitz JH, Allegra F, Canata G (2006) Osteochondral lesions of the talus: randomized controlled trial comparing chondroplasty, microfracture, and osteochondral autograft transplantation. Arthroscopy 22:1085–1092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gobbi A, Nunag P, Malinowski K (2005) Treatment of full thickness chondral lesions of the knee with microfracture in a group of athletes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:213–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Halasi T, Kynsburg A, Tallay A, Berkes I (2004) Development of a new activity score for the evaluation of ankle instability. Am J Sports Med 32:899–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Han SH, Lee JW, Lee DY, Kang ES (2006) Radiographic changes and clinical results of osteochondral defects of the talus with and without subchondral cysts. Foot Ankle Int 27:1109–1114

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hunt SA, Sherman O (2003) Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus with correlation of outcome scoring systems. Arthroscopy 19(4):360–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kerkhoffs GM, Reilingh ML, Gerards RM, de Leeuw PA (2014) Lift, drill, fill and fix (LDFF): a new arthroscopic treatment for talar osteochondral defects. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc May 20 [Epub ahead of print]

  20. Kim YS, Lee HJ, Choi YJ, Kim YI, Koh YG (2014) Does an injection of a stromal vascular fraction containing adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells influence the outcomes of marrow stimulation in osteochondral lesions of the talus? A clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Sports Med 42(10):2424–2434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, Nunley JA, Myerson MS, Sanders M (1994) Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 15:349–353

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kok AC, Sd Dunnen, Tuijthof GJ, van Dijk CN, Kerkhoffs GM (2012) Is technique performance a prognostic factor in bone marrow stimulation of the talus? J Foot Ankle Surg 51:777–782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kumai T, Takakura Y, Higashiyama I, Tamai S (1999) Arthroscopic drilling for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1229–1235

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lahm A, Erggelet C, Steinwachs M, Reichelt A (2006) Arthroscopic management of osteochondral lesion of the talus: results of drilling and usefulness of the magnetic resonance imaging before and after treatment. Arthroscopy 16:299–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee KB, Bai LB, Chung JY, Seon JK (2010) Arthroscopic microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:247–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee KB, Bai LB, Yoon TR, Jung ST, Seon JK (2009) Second-look arthroscopic findings and clinical outcomes after microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Am J Sports Med 37(Suppl 1):S63–S70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nehrer S, Spector M, Minas T (1999) Histologic analysis of tissue after failed cartilage repair procedures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 365:149–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pritsch M, Horoshovski H, Farine I (1986) Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68:862–865

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Robinson DE, Winson IG, Harries WJ, Kelly AJ (2003) Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:989–993

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sammarco GJ, Makwana NK (2002) Treatment of talarosteochondral lesions using local osteochondral graft. Foot Ankle Int 23:693–698

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schuman L, Struijs PA, van Dijk CN (2002) Arthroscopic treatment for osteochondral defects of the talus. results at follow up at 2 to 11 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:364–368

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Singleton SB, Briggs KK (1997) Microfracture technique for full-thickness chondral defects: technique and clinical results. Oper Tech Orthop 7:300–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Thermann H, Driessen A, Becher C (2008) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation in the treatment of articular cartilage lesions of the talus. Orthopade 37:232–239

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tol JL, Struijs PA, Bossuyt PM, Verhagen RA, van Dijk CN (2000) Treatment strategies in osteochondral defects of the talar dome: a systematic review. Foot Ankle Int 21:119–126

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. van Bergen CJ, de Leeuw PA, van Dijk CN (2009) Potential pitfall in the microfracturing technique during the arthroscopic treatment of an osteochondral lesion. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:184–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. vanDijk CN, Scholte D (1997) Arthroscopy of the ankle joint. Arthroscopy 13:90–96

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Verhagen RA, Struijs PA, Bossuyt PM, van Dijk CN (2003) Systematic review of treatment strategies for osteochondral defects of the talar dome. Foot Ankle Clin 8(233–242):391 Suppl: S233–S242

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chonnam National University Medical School and Hospital, 42 Jebongro, Donggu, Gwangju, 501-757, Republic of Korea

    Jun-Ik Choi & Keun-Bae Lee

Authors
  1. Jun-Ik Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keun-Bae Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keun-Bae Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choi, JI., Lee, KB. Comparison of clinical outcomes between arthroscopic subchondral drilling and microfracture for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24, 2140–2147 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3511-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3511-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation