Cartilage repair in the rabbit knee: mosaic plasty resulted in higher degree of tissue filling but affected subchondral bone more than microfracture technique
- 382 Downloads
Discrepancies and variances in outcome following different surgical techniques for cartilage repair are poorly understood. Successful repair relies on proper tissue filling without initiating degenerative processes in the cartilage–bone unit. Consequently, the objective of the current study was to compare two available techniques for cartilage repair, i.e., microfracture technique and mosaic plasty, regarding tissue filling and subchondral bone changes in an experimental model.
A 4-mm pure chondral defect was created in the medial femoral condyle of both knees in New Zealand rabbits, aged 22 weeks. A stereomicroscope was used to optimize the preparation of the defects. In one knee (randomized), the defect was treated with microfracture technique whereas in the other with mosaic plasty. The animals were killed at 12, 24 and 36 weeks after surgery. Defect filling, new bone formation above the level of the tidemark and the density of subchondral mineralized tissue were estimated by histomorphometry.
Mosaic plasty resulted in a significantly 34% higher degree of tissue filling than microfracture technique at 36 weeks, SD of mean difference being 34%. Mosaic plasty resulted in significantly more new bone formation and reduced subchondral mineralized tissue density compared to microfracture technique. The differences between the two techniques were apparent mainly at the long-term follow-up.
Tissue filling is a limiting factor regarding microfracture technique when compared to mosaic plasty, whereas mosaic plasty resulted in more bone changes than microfracture technique—the implications of the latter remain to be settled. This study underlines the difficulty in predicting outcome in the single case with any of these two techniques, particularly in a long-term perspective.
Level of evidence
KeywordsCartilage Chondral defect Microfracture Mosaic Filling Subchondral bone Knee Rabbit Surgery
The authors thank Ansgar Aasen and his staff at the Institute of Surgical Sciences, Dag Sørensen and his staff at the Institute of Comparative Medicine and bioengineer Aileen Murdoch Larsen for technical assistance. The study was supported by grants from Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre (OSTRC). The center is financed by the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, the Norwegian Olympic Committee & Confederation of Sport and Norsk Tipping.
Conflict of interest
No conflicting interests declared.
- 4.Årøen A (2005) Cartilage injuries and the repair process. Thesis. Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo. Unipub/AIT AS Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bartlett W, Skinner JA, Gooding CR, Carrington RW, Flanagan AM, Briggs TW, Bentley G (2005) Autologous chondrocyte implantation versus matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation for osteochondral defects of the knee: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(5):640–645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Brittberg M, Nilsson A, Lindahl A, Ohlsson C, Peterson L (1996) Rabbit articular cartilage defects treated with autologous cultured chondrocytes. Clin Orthop Relat Res (326):270–283Google Scholar
- 13.Buckwalter JA (1999) Evaluating methods of restoring cartilaginous articular surfaces. Clin Orthop Relat Res (367 Suppl):S224–S238Google Scholar
- 18.Frisbie DD, Oxford JT, Southwood L, Trotter GW, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR, Goodnight JL, McIlwraith CW (2003) Early events in cartilage repair after subchondral bone microfracture. Clin Orthop Relat Res (407):215–227Google Scholar
- 19.Frisbie DD, Trotter GW, Powers BE, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR, Howard RD, Park RD, McIlwraith CW (1999) Arthroscopic subchondral bone plate microfracture technique augments healing of large chondral defects in the radial carpal bone and medial femoral condyle of horses. Vet Surg 28(4):242–255PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Gooding CR, Bartlett W, Bentley G, Skinner JA, Carrington R, Flanagan A (2006) A prospective, randomised study comparing two techniques of autologous chondrocyte implantation for osteochondral defects in the knee: periosteum covered versus type I/III collagen covered. Knee 13(3):203–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Gudas R, Simonaityte R, Cekanauskas E, Tamosiunas R (2009) A prospective, randomized clinical study of osteochondral autologous transplantation versus microfracture for the treatment of osteochondritis dissecans in the knee joint in children. J Pediatr Orthop 29(7):741–748PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Gundersen HJ, Bagger P, Bendtsen TF, Evans SM, Korbo L, Marcussen N, Moller A, Nielsen K, Nyengaard JR, Pakkenberg B (1988) The new stereological tools: disector, fractionator, nucleator and point sampled intercepts and their use in pathological research and diagnosis. APMIS 96(10):857–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Hangody L (1997) Autogenous osteochondral graft technique for replacing knee cartilage defects in dogs. Orthop Int Ed 5(3):175–181Google Scholar
- 29.Heir S, Nerhus TK, Rotterud JH, Loken S, Ekeland A, Engebretsen L, Aroen A (2010) Focal cartilage defects in the knee impair quality of life as much as severe osteoarthritis: a comparison of knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score in 4 patient categories scheduled for knee surgery. Am J Sports Med 38(2):231–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Hurtig MB (1988) Experimental use of small osteochondral grafts for resurfacing the equine third carpal bone. Equine Vet J (6 Suppl):23–27Google Scholar
- 38.Knutsen G, Drogset JO, Engebretsen L, Grontvedt T, Isaksen V, Ludvigsen TC, Roberts S, Solheim E, Strand T, Johansen O (2007) A randomized trial comparing autologous chondrocyte implantation with microfracture. Findings at five years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(10):2105–2112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.Loken S, Jakobsen RB, Aroen A, Heir S, Shahdadfar A, Brinchmann JE, Engebretsen L, Reinholt FP (2008) Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells in a hyaluronan scaffold for treatment of an osteochondral defect in a rabbit model. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(10):896–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Loken S, Ludvigsen TC, Hoysveen T, Holm I, Engebretsen L, Reinholt FP (2009) Autologous chondrocyte implantation to repair knee cartilage injury: ultrastructural evaluation at 2 years and long-term follow-up including muscle strength measurements. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17(11):1278–1288PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.Mainil-Varlet P, Aigner T, Brittberg M, Bullough P, Hollander A, Hunziker E, Kandel R, Nehrer S, Pritzker K, Roberts S, Stauffer E (2003) Histological assessment of cartilage repair: a report by the Histology Endpoint Committee of the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS). J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(Suppl 2):45–57PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 56.O’Driscoll SW, Keeley FW, Salter RB (1986) The chondrogenic potential of free autogenous periosteal grafts for biological resurfacing of major full-thickness defects in joint surfaces under the influence of continuous passive motion. An experimental investigation in the rabbit. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68(7):1017–1035PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 61.Radin EL, Rose RM (1986) Role of subchondral bone in the initiation and progression of cartilage damage. Clin Orthop Relat Res (213):34–40Google Scholar
- 62.Saris DB, Vanlauwe J, Victor J, Haspl M, Bohnsack M, Fortems Y, Vandekerckhove B, Almqvist KF, Claes T, Handelberg F, Lagae K, van der BJ, Vandenneucker H, Yang KG, Jelic M, Verdonk R, Veulemans N, Bellemans J, Luyten FP (2008) Characterized chondrocyte implantation results in better structural repair when treating symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee in a randomized controlled trial versus microfracture. Am J Sports Med 36(2):235–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 66.Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Rodrigo JJ (2001) Microfracture: surgical technique and rehabilitation to treat chondral defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res (391 Suppl):S362–S369Google Scholar
- 70.Zeifang F, Oberle D, Nierhoff C, Richter W, Moradi B, Schmitt H (2010) Autologous chondrocyte implantation using the original periosteum-cover technique versus matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Sports Med 38(5):924–933PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar