Osteocondritis dissecans (OCD) is a relatively common cause of knee pain. Ideal treatment is still controversial. Aim of this exhibit is to describe the outcomes of 5 different surgical techniques in a series of 63 patients. 63patients (age 22.5±7.4 years) affected by OCD of the femoral condyle (45 medial and 17 lateral) were treated by either osteochondral autologous transplantation, autologous chondrocyte implantation with bone graft, biomimetic nanostructured osteochondral scaffold (Maioregen) implantation, bone-cartilage paste graft or bone marrow derived cells transplantation “one-step” technique. Patient evaluation included IKDC score, eq-vas score, X-Rays and MRI preoperatively and at follow-up. Global mean IKDC improved from pre-operative 40.1±14.6 to 77.2±21.3 (p<0.0005) at mean 5.3±4.7 years follow-up, while eq-vas improved from 51.7±17.0 to 83.5±18.3(p<0.0005). No influence of age, size of the lesion, length of follow-up and associated surgeries on the result was found. No differences were found between the results obtained with different surgeries except a slight tendency of better improvement in the result following autologous chondrocyte implantation (p<0.01). Control MRI evidenced a satisfactory repair of cartilaginous layer and subchondral bone. The techniques described were effective in providing good clinical and radiographic results in the treatment of OCD and confirmed the validity of autologous chondrocyte implantation over time. Newer techniques such as Maioregen implantation and “one-step” base on different rationales, the first relying on the characteristics of the scaffold and the second on the regenerative potential of mesenchymal cells. Both of them have the advantages to be minimally invasive surgeries and to require a single operation

Objective. To provide a best estimate of the average treatment effect when microfracture was chosen as the intervention of choice in patients with full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee. Design. We focussed on controlled studies which either referred to microfracture alone or in comparison with any other surgical treatment of articular cartilage of the knee. Papers including patients who had been treated by microfracture and concomitant adjuvant procedures like ACL reconstruction or meniscus repair were accepted too, whereas papers reporting on the microfracture technique combined with the implantation of a scaffold were excluded. To achieve a best estimate of the average, to be expected treatment effect we pooled pooled before–after data of study arms using microfracture. Because cartilage studies employ various scales to measure functional improvements, we standardized treatment effects using Hedges' g. To provide clinically meaningful estimates we converted the pooled summary effect back into the respective scales by multiplying the pooled effect with pooled standard deviations of each included clinical scale. Results. A systematic review of the literature revealed six papers including 200 patients with a mean age of 32 years, a mean defect size of 3 cm. 2. and a follow up period from 2 to 5 years. Four of the studies compared microfracture to autologous chondrocyte implantation and two of them to osteochondral autologous transplantation. All patients were treated by the microfracture technique as described by Steadman and by a similar rehabilitation protocol which only allowed crutch-assisted touchdown weight bearing initially. Referring to the individual studies, a comparison of the pooled estimates of Hedges' g revealed that the two papers which evaluated the youngest patients provided the highest treatment effect. On the contrary, those two papers which focussed on the largest lesions, reported the worst improvement. Finally, the remaining two papers whose patients were characterized by similar age and defect size presented comparable results. The individual standardized effect sizes were combined into an overall best estimate. Its value was 1.678, measured in units of standard deviation, with the 95% confidence interval of [1.016; 2.340] resulting in different values of the average, to be expected treatment effect when it is measured in Lysholm Score (22.1), IKDC Score (26.5) and KOOS (15.2) points. Conclusions. Our results offer a clinically intuitive estimation of the average treatment effects on common clinical scales. Compared to the preoperative situation, a significant clinical improvement can be expected for each patient. Nevertheless, the magnitudes of these treatment effects are an approximation and must be interpreted cautiously. Furthermore, we did not succeed to confirm that young age and small lesion size have a beneficial effect on the clinical outcome