Skip to main content

Registerforschung rund ums Knie: DEKOR, DART und KnorpelRegister DGOU: aktive Wissenschaft für jedermann

Knee registries: DEKOR, DART and KnorpelRegister DGOU: active science for everybody

Zusammenfassung

Die Etablierung der unterschiedlichen Register im Bereich der arthroskopischen Chirurgie basiert auf den Erfahrungen, welche mit den ersten Registern gesammelt wurden. Im Unterschied zum Endoprothesenregister Deutschland (EPRD) haben die später eingeführten Register PROMs („patient reported outcome measurments“) integriert, welche webbasiert in unterschiedlichen Zeitabschnitten abgefragt werden. Wie erfolgreich und wertvoll die Registerdaten sind, konnte das KnorpelRegister bereits mit 20 Publikation unter Beweis stellen. Das nachfolgend eingeführte Deutschsprachige Arthroskopieregister (DART) und Deutschsprachige Knie Osteotomie Register (DEKOR) führen die Entwicklung des KnorpelRegisters fort. Um Registerdaten qualitativ auswerten zu können, ist eine große Anzahl von Patienten erforderlich. Die Register sind daher für „jedermann“ gedacht und münden in Aussagen und Empfehlungen für „jedermann“.

Abstract

Registries of arthroscopic procedures and joint preservation have been established based on the experience of registries in other fields. In contrast to the EPRD (Endoprothesenregister Deutschland), registries which were introduced later included PROMs (patient-reported outcome measurements), i.e., web-based data from the patients at several follow-ups. The success of these registries is already proven. Meanwhile 20 publications using KnorpelRegister data have been published. The DART (Deutschsprachige Arthroskopieregister) and DEKOR (Deutschsprachige Knie Osteotomie Register) continue this development. To analyze the data of registries, large numbers of patients are required. Therefore, registries are established for all of us and lead to statements and recommendations for “everybody”.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. 1.

    Ahrend MD, Aurich M, Becher C et al (2020) Preexisting and treated concomitant ankle instability does not compromise patient-reported outcomes of solitary osteochondral lesions of the talus treated with matrix-induced bone marrow stimulation in the first postoperative year: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06172-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Alshaikh L, Katakura M, Shimozono Y (2020) Comment on “Concomitant ankle instability has a negative impact on the quality of life in patients with osteochondral lesions of the talus: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU)”. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06349-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Aurich M, Albrecht D, Angele P et al (2017) Treatment of osteochondral lesions in the ankle: a guideline from the group “clinical tissue regeneration” of the German Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (DGOU). Z Orthop Unfall 155:92–99

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Dephillipo NN, Laprade RF, Zaffagnini S et al (2021) The future of meniscus science: international expert consensus. J Exp Orthop 8:24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Elson DW, Dawson M, Wilson C et al (2015) The UK Knee Osteotomy Registry (UKKOR). Knee 22:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ettinger S, Gottschalk O, Kostretzis L et al (2020) One-year follow-up data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU) in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral defects of the talus. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03631-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Faber S, Angele P, Zellner J et al (2020) Comparison of clinical outcome following cartilage repair for patients with underlying varus deformity with or without additional high tibial osteotomy: a propensity score-matched study based on the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Cartilage. https://doi.org/10.1177/1947603520982347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Faber S, Zellner J, Angele P et al (2020) Decision making for concomitant high tibial osteotomy (HTO) in cartilage repair patients based on a nationwide cohort study of 4968 patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140:1437–1444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Gottschalk O, Baumbach SF, Altenberger S et al (2020) Influence of the medial malleolus osteotomy on the clinical outcome of M‑BMS + I/III collagen scaffold in medial talar osteochondral lesion (German Cartilage Register/Knorpelregister DGOU). Cartilage. https://doi.org/10.1177/1947603520961169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Hochrein A, Zinser W, Spahn G et al (2019) What parameters affect knee function in patients with untreated cartilage defects: baseline data from the German Cartilage Registry. Int Orthop 43:1107–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Jansson V, Grimberg A, Melsheimer O et al (2019) Orthopaedic registries: the German experience. EFORT Open Rev 4:401–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Körner D, Ateschrang A, Schröter S et al (2020) Concomitant ankle instability has a negative impact on the quality of life in patients with osteochondral lesions of the talus: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:3339–3346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Korner D, Gueorguiev B, Niemeyer P et al (2018) Correction to: Parameters influencing complaints and joint function in patients with osteochondral lesions of the ankle—an investigation based on data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138:1333–1334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Korner D, Gueorguiev B, Niemeyer P et al (2017) Parameters influencing complaints and joint function in patients with osteochondral lesions of the ankle—an investigation based on data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:367–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Körner D, Kohler P, Schröter S et al (2018) Pain in osteochondral lesions of the ankle—an investigation based on data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Z Orthop Unfall 156:160–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Maurer J, Grotejohann B, Jenkner C et al (2016) A registry for evaluation of efficiency and safety of surgical treatment of cartilage defects: the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). JMIR Res Protoc 5:e122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mehl J, Otto A, Willinger L et al (2019) Degenerative isolated cartilage defects of the patellofemoral joint are associated with more severe symptoms compared to trauma-related defects: results of the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:580–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Mueller-Rath R, Miltner O, Hochrein A et al (2017) The German Arthroscopy Registry (DART). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:3657–3660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Niemeyer P, Feucht MJ, Fritz J et al (2016) Cartilage repair surgery for full-thickness defects of the knee in Germany: indications and epidemiological data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:891–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Niemeyer P, Schweigler K, Grotejohann B et al (2015) The German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU) for evaluation of surgical treatment for cartilage defects: experience after six months including first demographic data. Z Orthop Unfall 153:67–74

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Pestka JM, Luu NH, Sudkamp NP et al (2018) Revision surgery after cartilage repair: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Orthop J Sports Med 6:2325967117752623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Spahn G, Fritz J, Albrecht D et al (2016) Characteristics and associated factors of Klee cartilage lesions: preliminary baseline-data of more than 1000 patients from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:805–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Weissenberger M, Heinz T, Boelch SP et al (2021) Correction to: Is debridement beneficial for focal cartilage defects of the knee: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 141:1081–1082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Weissenberger M, Heinz T, Boelch SP et al (2020) Is debridement beneficial for focal cartilage defects of the knee: data from the German Cartilage Registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140:373–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steffen Schröter.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

S. Schröter und R. Müller-Rath geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

figureqr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Redaktion

P. Niemeyer, München

S. Schröter, Siegen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schröter, S., Müller-Rath, R. Registerforschung rund ums Knie: DEKOR, DART und KnorpelRegister DGOU: aktive Wissenschaft für jedermann. Knie J. 3, 154–160 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43205-021-00119-7

Download citation

Schlüsselwörter

  • Osteotomie
  • Arthroskopie
  • Versorgungsforschung
  • Qualitätssicherung
  • Vergütung

Keywords

  • Osteotomy
  • Arthroscopy
  • Health services research
  • Quality assurance, health care
  • Remuneration