The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AUTOLOGOUS CHONDROCYTE IMPLANTATION AND OSTEOCHONDRAL CYLINDER TRANSPLANTATION IN CARTILAGE REPAIR OF THE KNEE JOINT: A PROSPECTIVE, COMPARATIVE TRIAL
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current methods used to restore the joint surface in patients with localized articular cartilage defects include transplantation of an autologous osteochondral cylinder and implantation of autologous chondrocytes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and histological outcomes of these two techniques. METHODS: We performed a prospective clinical study to investigate the two-year outcomes in forty patients with an articular cartilage lesion of the femoral condyle who had been randomly treated with either transplantation of an autologous osteochondral cylinder or implantation of autologous chondrocytes. Biopsy specimens from representative patients of both groups were evaluated with histological staining, immunohistochemistry, and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: According to the postoperative Lysholm score, the recovery after autologous chondrocyte implantation was slower than that after osteochondral transplantation at six months (p < or = 0.015), twelve months (p < or = 0.001), and twenty-four months (p < or = 0.012). On the basis of the Meyers score and the Tegner activity score, the results were equally good with the two methods two years after treatment. Histomorphological evaluation of biopsy specimens within two years after autologous chondrocyte implantation demonstrated a complete, mechanically stable resurfacing of the defect in all patients. The tissue consisted mainly of fibrocartilage, while localized areas of hyaline-like regenerative cartilage could be detected close to the subchondral bone. Although a gap remained at the site of the transplantation in all five biopsy specimens examined as long as two years after osteochondral cylinder transplantation, histomorphological analysis and scanning electron microscopy revealed no differences between the osteochondral transplants and the surrounding original cartilage. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments resulted in a decrease in symptoms. However, the improvement provided by the autologous chondrocyte implantation lagged behind that provided by the osteochondral cylinder transplantation. Histologically, the defects treated with autologous chondrocyte implantation were primarily filled with fibrocartilage, whereas the osteochondral cylinder transplants retained their hyaline character, although there was a persistent interface between the transplant and the surrounding original cartilage. Limitations of our study included the small number of patients, the relatively short (two-year) follow-up, and the absence of a control group.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries
TEGNER, Y., & LYSHOLM, J. (1985) · Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · doi:10.1097/00003086-198509000-00007 · Cited by 4,613
Myoblast-mediated gene transfer to the joint
Day, C. S., Kasemkijwattana, C., Menetrey, J., Floyd, S. S., Booth, D., Moreland, M. S., Fu, F. H., & Huard, J. (1997) · Journal of Orthopaedic Research · doi:10.1002/jor.1100150616 · Cited by 66
Cited by
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation Compared with Microfracture in the Knee: A Randomized Trial
Knutsen, G., Engebretsen, L., Ludvigsen, T. C., Drogset, J. O., Grøntvedt, T., Solheim, E., Strand, T., Roberts, S., Isaksen, V., & Johansen, O. (2004) · The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery · doi:10.2106/00004623-200403000-00001 · Cited by 1,248
Knutsen, G., Isaksen, V., Johansen, O., Drogset, J. O., Grøntvedt, T., Engebretsen, L., Ludvigsen, T. C., Roberts, S., Solheim, E., & Strand, T. (2007) · The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume · doi:10.2106/00004623-200710000-00002 · Cited by 895
Gudas, R., Kalesinskas, R. J., Kimtys, V., Stankevic̆ius, E., Tolius̆is, V., Bernotavic̆ius, G., & Smailys, A. (2005) · Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2005.06.018 · Cited by 579
Saris, D. B. F., Vanlauwe, J., Victor, J., Almqvist, K. F., Verdonk, R., Bellemans, J., & Luyten, F. P. (2009) · The American Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1177/0363546509350694 · Cited by 503
Basad, E., Ishaque, B., Bachmann, G., Stürz, H., & Steinmeyer, J. (2010) · Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy · doi:10.1007/s00167-009-1028-1 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- HORAS, U., PELINKOVIC, D., HERR, G., AIGNER, T., & SCHNETTLER, R.
- Venue
- The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume
- Published
- 2003-02
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 185-192
- ISSN
- 0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1942341118
- Cited by
- 784
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.43
- 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: AUTOLOGOUS CHONDROCYTE IMPLANTATION AND OSTEOCHONDRAL CYLINDER TRANSPLANTATION IN CARTILAGE REPAIR OF THE KNEE JOINT: A PROSPECTIVE, COMPARATIVE TRIAL. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/00004623-200302000-00001
- The paper
- HORAS, U., PELINKOVIC, D., HERR, G., AIGNER, T., & SCHNETTLER, R. (2003). AUTOLOGOUS CHONDROCYTE IMPLANTATION AND OSTEOCHONDRAL CYLINDER TRANSPLANTATION IN CARTILAGE REPAIR OF THE KNEE JOINT: A PROSPECTIVE, COMPARATIVE TRIAL. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200302000-00001
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.