Debridement
Microfracture
KOOS subscales
N
β
95 % CI
p
β
95 % CI
p
Pain
332
0.1
(−4.2 to 4.5)
ns
−4.2
(−8.6 to 0.2)
ns
Symptoms
335
1.0
(−3.8 to 5.7)
ns
−3.3
(−8.2 to 1.5)
ns
ADL
333
1.8
(−2.1 to 5.7)
ns
−2.7
(−6.6 to 1.2)
ns
Sport/rec
334
−0.2
(−7.9 to 7.5)
ns
−8.6
(−16.4 to −0.7)
0.032
QoL
335
2.1
(−4.3 to 8.4)
ns
−7.2
(−13.6 to −0.8)
0.028
42.3 Conclusions on Treatment Strategies
Since there is no evidence that surgical treatment of a concomitant cartilage lesion in ACL-injured knees will reduce the risk of later OA, surgical treatment of these cartilage lesions should be restricted to symptomatic lesions.
Even for symptomatic lesions, to date, none of the surgical treatment options for concomitant cartilage lesions in ACL-injured knees are proven to be superior compared to leaving these cartilage lesions untreated. Microfracture of concomitant full-thickness cartilage lesions in ACL-injured knees should probably be avoided until future studies have identified if there are any subgroups of patients that might benefit from microfracture of cartilage lesions at the time of ACL reconstruction.
Some selected ACL-injured patients that are well suited for cartilage surgery might benefit from surgical treatment of concomitant cartilage lesions. For unstable lesions, debridement is a simple and easy procedure to perform, which might relieve symptoms. However, current evidence suggests that no treatment of the cartilage lesions is a safe and sound first-line option in the majority of ACL-injured patients.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
Bekkers JE, Inklaar M, Saris DB (2009) Treatment selection in articular cartilage lesions of the knee: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 37(Suppl 1):148S–155SCrossrefPubMed