Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 683

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

THE MICROFRACTURE TECHNIQUE FOR THE TREATMENT OF ARTICULAR CARTILAGE LESIONS IN THE KNEE: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

MITHOEFER, KAI, WILLIAMS, RILEY J., WARREN, RUSSELL F., POTTER, HOLLIS G., SPOCK, CHRISTOPHER R., JONES, EDWARD C., WICKIEWICZ, THOMAS L., MARX, ROBERT G.·2005·The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Microfracture is a frequently used technique for the repair of articular cartilage lesions of the knee. Despite the popularity of the technique, prospective information about the clinical results after microfracture is still limited. The purpose of our study was to identify the factors that affect the clinical outcome from this cartilage repair technique. METHODS: Forty-eight symptomatic patients with isolated full-thickness articular cartilage defects of the femur in a stable knee were treated with the microfracture technique. Prospective evaluation of patient outcome was performed for a minimum follow-up of twenty-four months with a combination of validated outcome scores, subjective clinical rating, and cartilage-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: At the time of the latest follow-up, knee function was rated good to excellent for thirty-two patients (67%), fair for twelve patients (25%), and poor for four (8%). Significant increases in the activities of daily living scores, International Knee Documentation Committee scores, and the physical component score of the Short Form-36 were demonstrated after microfracture (p < 0.05). A lower body-mass index correlated with higher scores for the activities of daily living and SF-36 physical component, with the worst results for patients with a body-mass index of >30 kg/m(2). Significant improvement in the activities of daily living score was more frequent with a preoperative duration of symptoms of less than twelve months (p < 0.05). Magnetic resonance imaging in twenty-four knees demonstrated good repair-tissue fill in the defect in thirteen patients (54%), moderate fill in seven (29%), and poor fill in four patients (17%). The fill grade correlated with the knee function scores. All knees with good fill demonstrated improved knee function, whereas poor fill grade was associated with limited improvement and decreasing functional scores after twenty-four months. CONCLUSIONS: Microfracture repair of articular cartilage lesions in the knee results in significant functional improvement at a minimum follow-up of two years. The best short-term results are observed with good fill grade, low body-mass index, and a short duration of preoperative symptoms. A high body-mass index adversely affects short-term outcome, and a poor fill grade is associated with limited short-term durability.

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 · 10.2106/00004623-200509000-00002

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

Metadata

Authors
MITHOEFER, K., WILLIAMS, R. J., WARREN, R. F., POTTER, H. G., SPOCK, C. R., JONES, E. C., WICKIEWICZ, T. L., & MARX, R. G.
Venue
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume
Published
2005-09
Volume
87
Issue
9
Pages
1911-1920
ISSN
0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974897852
Cited by
683
References
0
FWCI
12.02
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

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.