Subscribe to RSS
Download PDF
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1712493
Lesões condrais maiores tratadas com uso de membrana de colágeno – condrogênese autóloga induzida por matriz – apresentam maior aumento nos escores clínicos
Article in several languages: português | English
Resumo
Objetivo Avaliar clínica e radiologicamente os resultados do tratamento das lesões condrais com a membrana de colágeno – condrogênese autóloga induzida por matriz.
Métodos Trata-se de uma série de casos observacional, na qual foram analisados 15 pacientes submetidos a condrogênese autóloga induzida por matriz. A avaliação clínica foi feita comparando os escores de Lysholm e International Knee Document Commitee (IKDC, na sigla em inglês) no pré- e pós-operatório de 12 meses, e avaliação radiológica através do escore de Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART, na sigla em inglês) no mesmo período de pós-operatório.
Resultados A média de idade dos pacientes foi 39,2 anos, e a média do tamanho das lesões condrais foi de 1,55cm2. Houve uma melhora significativa nos escores clínicos, com média de aumento de 24,6 pontos no Lysholm e de 24,3 no IKDC, após 12 meses. Na avaliação radiológica, o MOCART teve média de 65 pontos. Observou-se que quanto maior o tamanho da lesão, maior foi a melhora nos escores.
Conclusão Avaliando escores clínicos subjetivos, o tratamento das lesões condrais com a membrana de colágeno mostrou bons resultados, assim como a avaliação de MOCART, com maior benefício em lesões maiores.
∗ Trabalho desenvolvido no Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Suporte Financeiro
Não houve suporte financeiro de fontes públicas, comerciais, ou sem fins lucrativos.
Publication History
Received: 11 December 2019
Accepted: 02 March 2020
Article published online:
25 September 2020
© 2020. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
-
Referências
- 1 Gottardi R, Hansen U, Raiteri R. et al. Supramolecular Organization of Collagen Fibrils in Healthy and Osteoarthritic Human Knee and Hip Joint Cartilage. PLoS One 2016; 11 (10) e0163552
- 2 Arøen A, Løken S, Heir S. et al. Articular cartilage lesions in 993 consecutive knee arthroscopies. Am J Sports Med 2004; 32 (01) 211-215
- 3 Buckwalter JA, Mankin HJ. Articular cartilage: degeneration and osteoarthritis, repair, regeneration, and transplantation. Instr Course Lect 1998; 47: 487-504
- 4 Raimondi MT, Bonacina E, Candiani G. et al. Comparative chondrogenesis of human cells in a 3D integrated experimental-computational mechanobiology model. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 2011; 10 (02) 259-268
- 5 Heir S, Nerhus TK, Røtterud JH. et al. Focal cartilage defects in the knee impair quality of life as much as severe osteoarthritis: a comparison of knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score in 4 patient categories scheduled for knee surgery. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (02) 231-237
- 6 Farr J, Gomoll AH. 2016 barriers to cartilage restoration. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2016; 7 (03) 183-186
- 7 Kubosch EJ, Erdle B, Izadpanah K. et al. Clinical outcome and T2 assessment following autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis in osteochondral lesions of the talus. Int Orthop 2016; 40 (01) 65-71
- 8 Steinwachs M. New technique for cell-seeded collagen-matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Arthroscopy 2009; 25 (02) 208-211
- 9 Kon E, Filardo G, Di Matteo B, Perdisa F, Marcacci M. Matrix assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation for cartilage treatment: A systematic review. Bone Joint Res 2013; 2 (02) 18-25
- 10 Pridie K. A method of resurfacing osteoarthritic knee joints. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1959; 41: 618-619
- 11 Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Rodrigo JJ. Microfracture: surgical technique and rehabilitation to treat chondral defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; ;(391, Suppl) S362-S369
- 12 Richter W. Mesenchymal stem cells and cartilage in situ regeneration. J Intern Med 2009; 266 (04) 390-405
- 13 Hunziker EB. Articular cartilage repair: basic science and clinical progress. A review of the current status and prospects. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002; 10 (06) 432-463
- 14 Kusano T, Jakob RP, Gautier E, Magnussen RA, Hoogewoud H, Jacobi M. Treatment of isolated chondral and osteochondral defects in the knee by autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (10) 2109-2115
- 15 Bark S, Piontek T, Behrens P, Mkalaluh S, Varoga D, Gille J. Enhanced microfracture techniques in cartilage knee surgery: Fact or fiction?. World J Orthop 2014; 5 (04) 444-449
- 16 Gille J, Behrens P, Volpi P. et al. Outcome of Autologous Matrix Induced Chondrogenesis (AMIC) in cartilage knee surgery: data of the AMIC Registry. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013; 133 (01) 87-93
- 17 Benthien JP, Behrens P. Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC). A one-step procedure for retropatellar articular resurfacing. Acta Orthop Belg 2010; 76 (02) 260-263
- 18 Behrens P. Matrixgekoppelte Mikrofrakturierung. Arthroskopie 2005; 18: 193-197
- 19 Anders S, Martin Volz, Frick H, Gellissen J. A randomized, controlled trial comparing autologus matrix inducedchondrogenesis (AMIC) to microfracture: analysis of 1- and2-year follow-up data of 2 centers. Open Orthop J 2013; 7 (Suppl 1) M4:133-143
- 20 Peccin MS, Ciconneli R, Cohen M. Questionário específico para sintomas do joelho Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale –Tradução e validação para a língua Portuguesa. Acta Ortop Bras 2006; 14 (05) 268-272
- 21 Hefti F, Müller W, Jakob RP, Stäubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1993; 1 (3-4): 226-234
- 22 Marlovits S, Striessnig G, Resinger CT. et al. Definition of pertinent parameters for the evaluation of articular cartilage repair tissue with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2004; 52 (03) 310-319
- 23 Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 2nd . Boston: PWS Publishers; 1986
- 24 Astur DC, Lopes JC, Santos MA, Kaleka CC, Amaro JT, Cohen M. Surgical treatment of chondral knee defects using a collagen membrane - autologus matrix-induced chondrogenesis. Rev Bras Ortop 2018; 53 (06) 733-739
- 25 Fontana A, de Girolamo L. Sustained five-year benefit of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis for femoral acetabular impingement-induced chondral lesions compared with microfracture treatment. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B (05) 628-635
- 26 Piontek T, Ciemniewska-Gorzela K, Szulc A, Naczk J, Słomczykowski M. All-arthroscopic AMIC procedure for repair of cartilage defects of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (05) 922-925
- 27 Schagemann J, Behrens P, Paech A. et al. Mid-term outcome of arthroscopic AMIC for the treatment of articular cartilage defects in the knee joint is equivalent to mini-open procedures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2018; 138 (06) 819-825
- 28 Dhollander A, Moens K, Van der Maas J, Verdonk P, Almqvist KF, Victor J. Treatment of patellofemoral cartilage defects in the knee by autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC. Acta Orthop Belg 2014; 80 (02) 251-259