Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation in osteochondral lesions of the talus: mid-term T2-mapping MRI evaluation

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

Abstract

Purpose

Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in the ankle has become an established procedure to treat osteochondral lesions. However, a non-invasive method able to provide information on the nature of the repair tissue is needed. Recently, MRI T2 mapping was identified as a method capable of qualitatively characterizing articular cartilage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the mid-term results of a series of patients arthroscopically treated by ACI and investigate the nature of the repair tissue by MRI T2 mapping.

Methods

Twenty patients, aged 35 ± 8 years, with an osteochondral lesion of the talus, underwent ACI and were evaluated at 5 ± 1 years’ follow-up clinically (AOFAS score) and by the MRI T2-mapping sequence. MRI images were acquired using a protocol proposed by the International Cartilage Repair Society, evaluated by the MOCART score and completed by the T2-mapping sequence. Healthy volunteers, mean age 29 ± 6 years, were enrolled, and their T2 map values were used as a control. Their MRI results were then correlated with the clinical score.

Results

The AOFAS score increased from 59 ± 16 pre-operatively to 84 ± 18 at follow-up (P < 0.0005). Patients with more than 4 years’ follow-up were found to have the most satisfactory results. On the basis of the controls, healthy hyaline cartilage tissue showed a T2 map value of 35–45 ms. A mean T2 map value compatible with normal hyaline cartilage was found in all the cases treated, covering a mean percentage of 69% ± 22 of the repaired lesion area.

Conclusions

ACI was able to provide durable results that improved over time. Because of its ability to detect cartilage quality, the MRI T2-mapping sequence integrated with the Mocart score is a valid, non-invasive technique in evaluating the nature of the repair tissue in the ankle joint.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study, Level IV.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Al-Shaikh RA, Chou LB, Mann JA et al (2002) Autologous osteochondral grafting for talar cartilage defects. Foot Ankle Int 23:381–389

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Battaglia M, Rimondi E, Monti C, et al. (2010) Validity of T2 mapping in characterization of the regeneration tissue by bone marrow derived cell transplantation in osteochondral lesions of the ankle. Eur J Radiol. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.08.008

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brittberg M, Lindahl A, Nilsson A et al (1994) Treatment of deep cartilage defects in the knee withautologous chondrocyte transplantation. N Engl J Med 331:889–895

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Brittberg M, Winalski CS (2003) Evaluation of cartilage injuries and repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(Suppl 2):58–69

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Buckwalter JA (1999) Evaluating methods of restoring cartilaginous articular surfaces. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367(Suppl):S224–S238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Caumo F, Russo A, Faccioli N et al (2007) Autologous chondrocyte implantation: prospective MRI evaluation with clinical. Correl Radiol Med 112:722–773

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Choi YS, Potter HG, Chun TJ (2008) MR imaging of cartilage repair in the knee and ankle. Radiographics 28:1043–1059

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gautier E, Kolker D, Jakob RP (2002) Treatment of cartilage defects of the talus by autologous osteochondral grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:237–244

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Giannini S, Buda R, Grigolo B et al (2001) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation in osteochondral lesions of the ankle joint. Foot Ankle Int 22:513–517

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 

  12. Giannini S, Buda R, Faldini C et al (2005) Surgical treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus in young active patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(Suppl 2):28–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Giannini S, Buda R, Grigolo B et al (2005) The detached osteochondral fragment as a source of cells for autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in the ankle joint. Osteoarthr Cartil 13:601–607

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Giannini S, Buda R, Vannini F et al (2008) Arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation in osteochondral lesions of the talus: surgical technique and results. Am J Sports Med 36:873–880

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Giannini S, Buda R, Vannini F et al (2009) One-step bone marrow-derived cell transplantation in talar osteochondral lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:3307–3320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giannini S, Battaglia M, Buda R et al (2009) Surgical treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus by open-field autologous chondrocyte implantation: a 10-year follow-up clinical and magnetic resonance imaging T2-mapping evaluation. Am J Sports Med 37(Suppl 1):112S–118S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Giannini S, Buda R, Cavallo M et al (2010) Cartilage repair evolution in post-traumatic osteochondral lesions of the talus: from open field autologous chondrocyte to bone-marrow-derived cells transplantation. Injury 41:1196–1203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gold GE, McCauley TR, Gray ML et al (2003) What’s new in cartilage? Radiographics 23:1227–1242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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 

  21. Henderson I, Lavigne P, Valenzuela H et al (2007) Autologous chondrocyte implantation: superior biologic properties of hyaline cartilage repairs. Clin Orthop Relat Res 455:226–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kitaoka HB, Patzer GL (1997) Analysis of clinical grading scales for the foot and ankle. Foot Ankle Int 18:443–446

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kreuz PC, Steinwachs M, Erggelet C et al (2006) Mosaicplasty with autogenous talar autograft for osteochondral lesions of the talus after failed primary arthroscopic management: a prospective study with a 4-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 34:55–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee CH, Chao KH, Huang GS et al (2003) Osteochondral autografts for osteochondritis dissecans of the talus. Foot Ankle Int 24:815–822

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Marlovits S, Singer P, Zeller P et al (2006) Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol 57:16–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ (2004) Cartilage MRI T2 relaxation time mapping: overview and applications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:355–368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nam EK, Ferkel RD, Applegate GR (2009) Autologous chondrocyte implantation of the ankle: a 2- to 5-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 37:274–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Quirbach S, Trattnig S, Marlovits S et al (2009) Initial results of in vivo high-resolution morphological and biochemical cartilage imaging of patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the ankle. Skeletal Radiol 38:751–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Scranton PE Jr, McDermott JE (2001) Treatment of type V osteochondral lesions of the talus with ipsilateral knee osteochondral autografts. Foot Ankle Int 22:380–384

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Scranton PE Jr, Frey CC, Feder KS (2006) Outcome of osteochondral autograft transplantation for type-V cystic osteochondral lesions of the talus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:614–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tol JL, Struijs PA, Bossuyt PM et al (2000) Treatment strategies in osteochondral defects of the talar dome: a systematic review. Foot Ankle Int 21:119–126

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Verhagen RA, Struijs PA, Bossuyt PM et al (2003) Systematic review of treatment strategies for osteochondral defects of the talar dome. Foot Ankle Clin 8:233–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Weber M et al (2008) High-resolution morphological and biochemical imaging of articular cartilage of the ankle joint at 3.0 T using a new dedicated phased array coil: in vivo reproducibility study. Skeletal Radiol 37:519–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Hughes T et al (2008) In vivo biochemical 7.0 Tesla magnetic resonance: preliminary results of dGEMRIC, zonal T2, and T2* mapping of articular cartilage. Invest Radiol 43:619–626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Welsch GH, Trattnig S, Scheffler K et al (2008) Magnetization transfer contrast and T2 mapping in the evaluation of cartilage repair tissue with 3T MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:979–986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Marlovits S et al (2009) Quantitative T2 mapping during follow-up after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT): full-thickness and zonal evaluation to visualize the maturation of cartilage repair tissue. J Orthop Res 27:957–963

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Zengerink M, Struijs P, Tol JL et al (2010) Treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:238–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesca Vannini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Battaglia, M., Vannini, F., Buda, R. et al. Arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation in osteochondral lesions of the talus: mid-term T2-mapping MRI evaluation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19, 1376–1384 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1509-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1509-x

Keywords

Navigation