To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Mesenchymal stem cell vs. chondrocyte implantation for repair of chondral knee defects

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
April 2015

Mesenchymal stem cell vs. chondrocyte implantation for repair of chondral knee defects

Vol: 4| Issue: 4| Number:83| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Matrix-induced autologous mesenchymal stem cell implantation versus matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation in the treatment of chondral defects of the knee: a 2-year randomized study

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015 Feb;135(2):251-63.

Contributing Authors:
I Akgun MC Unlu OA Erdal T Ogut M Erturk E Ovali F Kantarci G Caliskan Y Akgun

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

14 patients with isolated single full-thickness femoral condylar chondral defects of the knee (>2 cm-squared in area) qualifying for cartilage repair surgery were randomized to receive either matrix-induced autologous mesenchymal stem cell implantation (m-AMI), or matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (m-ACI). The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the objective and sub...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue