Skip to main content
Log in

Der autologe Transfer der posterioren Femurkondyle bei ausgedehnten osteochondralen Schäden des Knies

5-Jahres-Ergebnisse der Mega-OATS-Technik

Autologous transfer of the posterior femoral condyle for large osteochondral lesions of the knee

5-year results of the Mega-OATS technique

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Der Orthopäde Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Bei jungen und aktiven Patienten mit großen osteochondralen Defekten in der femoralen Belastungszone wurde ein autologer Transfer der posterioren Femurkondyle durchgeführt. Diese Technik dient als Salvageoperation, um den Patienten wieder eine angemessene Mobilität zu ermöglichen.

Material und Methode

Zwischen 07/1999 und 12/2000 wurden 18 Patienten operiert; 16 Patienten wurden unter Verwendung des Lysholm-Scores nachuntersucht. Es wurden Röntgenaufnahmen und von 8 Patienten zusätzlich Magnetresonanztomographien (MRT) angefertigt. Das Patientenalter zum Zeitpunkt der Operation betrug durchschnittlich 37,4 (15–59) Jahre, das Follow-up 55,2 (46–62) Monate. Der Defekt maß im Durchschnitt 5,4 (3,1–7,1) cm2 und war zu 81% Folge eines Traumas oder einer Osteochondrosis dissecans.

Ergebnisse

Der Lysholm-Score verbesserte sich signifikant (p=0,001) von median 65 auf postoperativ 86 Punkte; 15 Patienten waren wieder in der Lage Sport auszuüben. Bei 12 Patienten zeigte sich eine Abrundung der Osteotomiekante und bei 11 eine knochendichte Auffüllung des Entnahmebereichs. Alle MRT-Aufnahmen zeigten einen vitalen und kongruenten Zylinder.

Schlussfolgerung

Damit ist das Verfahren sehr gut geeignet, um große und tiefgehende fokale osteochondrale Defekte in der femoralen Belastungszone zu decken.

Abstract

Background

Large osteochondral defects of the weight-bearing zones of the femoral condyles in young and active patients were treated by autologous transfer of the posterior femoral condyle. This technique is a salvage procedure and aims at pain-free mobility of patients.

Material and methods

Between July 1999 and December 2000, 18 patients were operated on. Sixteen patients were evaluated using the Lysholm score. X-rays were done, and eight individuals underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis. The average age at the date of surgery was 37.4 (15–59) years, and the mean follow-up time was 55.2 (46–62) months. The mean defect size was 5.4 cm² (3.1–7.1). Trauma or osteochondrosis dissecans was pathogenetic in 81%.

Results

The Lysholm score showed a significant (p=0.001) increase from a preoperative median of 65.0 to a postoperative median of 86.0 points. Fifteen patients returned to sport activities. X-rays showed a rounding of the osteotomy edge in 12 patients and a partial bone-dense remodelling of the posterior femoral condyle in 11 patients. All MRI examinations showed vital and congruent grafts.

Conclusion

Thus, the procedure is recommended for treating large and deep focal osteochondral lesions in the weight-bearing zone of the femoral condyle.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Agneskirchner JD, Brucker P, Burkart A et al (2002) Large osteochondral defects of the femoral condyle: press-fit transplantation of the posterior femoral condyle (MEGA-OATS). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 10:160–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alford JW, Cole BJ (2005) Cartilage restoration, part 1: basic science, historical perspective, patient evaluation, and treatment options. Am J Sports Med 33:295–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alford JW, Cole BJ (2005) Cartilage restoration, part 2: techniques, outcomes, and future directions. Am J Sports Med 33:443–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bartlett W, Gooding CR, Carrington RW et al (2005) Autologous chondrocyte implantation at the knee using a bilayer collagen membrane with bone graft. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:330–332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bobic V (1996) Arthroscopic osteochondral autograft transplantation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary clinical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 3:262–264

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bobic V, Noble J (2000) Articular cartilage-to repair or not to repair. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:165–166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Braun S (2005) Autologe Knochen-Knorpel-Transplantation. Arthroskopie 3:219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Braun S, Minzlaff P, Hollweck R et al (2008) The 5.5-year results of MegaOATS – autologous transfer of the posterior femoral condyle: a case-series study. Arthritis Res Ther 10:68

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brittberg M, Peterson L, Sjogren-Jansson E et al (2003) Articular cartilage engineering with autologous chondrocyte transplantation. A review of recent developments. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(Suppl 3):109–115

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brucker P, Agneskirchner JD, Burkart A et al (2002) Mega-OATS. Technique and outcome. Unfallchirurg 105:443–449

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Brucker PU, Braun S, Imhoff AB (2008) Mega-OATS technique – autologous osteochondral transplantation as a salvage procedure for large osteochondral defects of the femoral condyle. Oper Orthop Traumatol 20:188–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Burkart a IA, Dirisamer F, Steinhauser E, Brucker P (2000) Clinical and biomechanical results after transfer of the posterior femoral condyle as a salvage procedure. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Orthopädie und Traumatologie, Annual Meeting 2000, Wiesbaden

  14. Burkart AC, Schoettle PB, Imhoff AB (2001) Surgical therapeutic possibilities of cartilage damage. Unfallchirurg 104:798–807

    Article  CAS  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. Griffin T, Rowden N, Morgan D et al (2007) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: a systematic study. ANZ J Surg 77:214–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hangody L, Fules P (2003) Autologous osteochondral mosaicplasty for the treatment of full-thickness defects of weight-bearing joints: ten years of experimental and clinical experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(Suppl 2):25–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hangody L, Kish G, Karpati Z et al (1997) Arthroscopic autogenous osteochondral mosaicplasty for the treatment of femoral condylar articular defects. A preliminary report. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 5:262–267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Imhoff AB, Burkart A, Ottl GM (1999) Transfer of the posterior femoral condyle. First experience with a salvage operation. Orthopade 28:45–51

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Karataglis D, Learmonth DJ (2005) Management of big osteochondral defects of the knee using osteochondral allografts with the MEGA-OATS technique. Knee 12:389–393

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Laprell H, Petersen W (2001) Autologous osteochondral transplantation using the diamond bone-cutting system (DBCS): 6–12 years‘ follow-up of 35 patients with osteochondral defects at the knee joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 121:248–253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marcacci M, Kon E, Delcogliano M et al (2007) Arthroscopic autologous osteochondral grafting for cartilage defects of the knee: prospective study results at a minimum 7-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 35:2014–2021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mueller W (1978) Osteochondrosis dissecans. In: Hastings D (Hrsg) Progress in orthopedic surgery, vol 3. Springer, Berlin New York, pp 135–142

  24. Peterson L, Brittberg M, Kiviranta I et al (2002) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Biomechanics and long-term durability. Am J Sports Med 30:2–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Prakash D, Learmonth D (2002) Natural progression of osteo-chondral defect in the femoral condyle. Knee 9:7–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shapiro F, Koide S, Glimcher MJ (1993) Cell origin and differentiation in the repair of full-thickness defects of articular cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg 75:532–553

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Trieb K, Grohs J, Hanslik-Schnabel B et al (2006) Age predicts outcome of high-tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:149–152

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wagner H (1964) Surgical treatment of osteochondritis dissecans, a cause of arthritis deformans of the knee. Rev Chir Orthop Reparat Apparat Mot 50:335–352

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wirth C (2001) Kniegelenk. In: Wirth CJ, Jäger M (Hrsg) Praxis der Orthopädie, Bd. 3. Thieme, Stuttgart New York, S 506–554

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Minzlaff.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Minzlaff, P., Braun, S., Haller, B. et al. Der autologe Transfer der posterioren Femurkondyle bei ausgedehnten osteochondralen Schäden des Knies. Orthopäde 39, 631–636 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-010-1608-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-010-1608-2

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation