Abstract
Introduction: Initial results for the management of osteochondral defects with both ACI-C and MACI have been encouraging, showing significant clinical improvement. This single-centre study set out to determine any significant difference in outcomes between ACI-C and MACI.
Aim: Reporting three year follow up of clinical and arthroscopic assessment of prospective analysis of ACI-C and MACI used in the management of symptomatic, full-thickness chondral and osteochondral defects in the knee.
Method: Following assessment arthroscopy and harvesting of chondrocytes for culture, patients were randomised into the ACI-C or MACI arm and underwent their respective procedures one month later. In ACI-C a covered technique is employed using a porcine-derived type I/III collagen membrane sutured in place; MACI requires cultured autologous chondrocytes to be seeded in a bi-layered type I/III collagen membrane which is glued into position. An arthroscopy was performed at 12 and 24 months postprocedure to assess graft coverage and biopsies taken to determine extent of hyaline, mixed and fibro-cartilage proliferation.
Results: 102 patients underwent either ACI-C (44) or MACI (58) with an average age of 33.6 (14–52). Mean Cincinnati knee rating scores recorded prior to assessment arthroscopy for ACI-C: 45.2 (10 – 94) and MACI: 45.5 (10 – 90) showed improvement at follow up with 63% of patients in the ACI-C group scoring good or excellent at three years, and 60% in the MACI group. ICRS arthroscopy scores were good or excellent in 91.4% of ACI-C and 76.1% of MACI patients at 24 months. Biopsies of the transplants at 24 months revealed proliferation of hyaline and mixed cartilage (hyaline and fibro-cartilage) in 48.6% of the ACI-C and 30.5% of the MACI patients.
Conclusion: Results to date suggest significant clinical and arthroscopic improvement following ACI-C and MACI, with evidence of proliferation of hyaline cartilage at the transplant site. Limited differences are noted between the outcomes of the two techniques.
Correspondence should be addressed to: EFORT Central Office, Technoparkstrasse 1, CH – 8005 Zürich, Switzerland. Email: office@efort.org