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

Similar 2-yr clinical scores between hydrogel implant & OAT for Outerbridge III-IV cartilage lesions

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
November 2018

Similar 2-yr clinical scores between hydrogel implant & OAT for Outerbridge III-IV cartilage lesions

Vol: 7| Issue: 11| Number:18| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Hydrogel implant is as effective as osteochondral autologous transplantation for treating focal cartilage knee injury in 24 months

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 Oct;26(10):2934-2941. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-4834-5

Contributing Authors:
M Cohen M Ferretti JT Amaro P Debieux AAB de Queiroz

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

Synopsis

38 patients with Outerbridge grade III-IV focal cartilage lesions were randomized to surgical internvetion through either transplantation using a hydrogel implant (Cartiva; Carticept Medical) or osteochondral autologous transplantation (OAT). Patients were assessed for outcome related to function and pain over 24-month follow-up. Results demonstrated no statistically significant between-group diff...

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