Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 939

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Articular cartilage defects in 1,000 knee arthroscopies

Hjelle, Karin, Solheim, Eirik, Strand, Torbjørn, Muri, Rune, Brittberg, Mats·2002·Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: Focal chondral or osteochondral defects can be painful and disabling, have a poor capacity for repair, and may predispose patients for osteoarthritis. New surgical procedures that aim to reestablish hyaline cartilage have been introduced and the results seem promising. The purpose of this study is to provide reliable data on chondral and osteochondral defects in patients with symptomatic knees requiring arthroscopy and to calculate the prevalence of patients who might benefit from cartilage repair surgery. TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective study. METHODS: One thousand consecutive knee arthroscopies were included in this study. Immediately after each arthroscopy, the surgeon completed a questionnaire providing detailed information about the findings. Chondral and osteochondral lesions were classified in accordance with the system recommended by the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS). RESULTS: Chondral or osteochondral lesions (of any type) were found in 61% of the patients. Focal chondral or osteochondral defects were found in 19% of the patients. In these patients, 61% related their current knee problem to a previous trauma, and a concomitant meniscal or anterior cruciate ligament injury was found in 42% (n = 81) and 26% (n = 50), respectively. The mean chondral or osteochondral total defect area was 2.1 cm(2) (range, 0.5 to 12; standard deviation [SD], 1.5). The main focal chondral or osteochondral defect was found on the medial femoral condyle in 58%, patella in 11%, lateral tibia in 11%, lateral femoral condyle in 9%, trochlea in 6%, and medial tibia in 5%. It has been suggested that cartilage repair surgery may be most suitable in patients younger than 40 to 50 years old. A single, well-defined ICRS grade III or IV defect with an area of at least 1 cm(2) in a patient younger than 40, 45, or 50 years accounted for 5.3%, 6.1%, and 7.1% of all arthroscopies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the contention that articular cartilage defects are common. It has the advantages of a prospective design and use of a new classification system recommended by the ICRS. This modern system focuses on objectively measurable parameters of the lesion's extent and not its surface appearance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/jars.2002.32839

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 939

Metadata

Authors
Hjelle, K., Solheim, E., Strand, T., Muri, R., & Brittberg, M.
Venue
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-09
Volume
18
Issue
7
Pages
730-734
ISSN
0749-8063 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088564623
Cited by
939
References
0
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Articular cartilage defects in 1,000 knee arthroscopies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/jars.2002.32839
The paper
Hjelle, K., Solheim, E., Strand, T., Muri, R., & Brittberg, M. (2002). Articular cartilage defects in 1,000 knee arthroscopies. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1053/jars.2002.32839

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.