Long-term Outcomes After Osteochondral Autograft Transfer: A Systematic Review at Mean Follow-up of 10.2 Years.
Review
Overview
abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate (1) activity level and knee function, (2) reoperation and failure rates, and (3) risk factors for reoperation and failure of osteochondral autograft transfer (OAT) at minimum long-term follow-up. METHODS: A comprehensive review was performed for long-term outcomes after OAT. Studies reported on activity-based outcomes (Tegner Activity Scale) and clinical outcomes (Lysholm score and International Knee Documentation Committee score). Reoperation and failure rates, as defined by the publishing authors, were recorded for each study. Modified Coleman Methodology Scores were calculated to assess study methodological quality. RESULTS: Ten studies with a total of 610 patients with an average age of 27.0 years at the time of surgery and a mean follow-up of 10.2 years were included. The mean defect size was 2.6 cm(2) (range, 0.9 to 20.0 cm(2)). The mean duration of symptoms before surgery was 4.8 years. From preoperative to final follow-up, International Knee Documentation Committee scores and Lysholm scores improved significantly by 42.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 31.8 to 53.1, P < .001) and 21.1 (95% CI, 12.2 to 30.0, P < .01), respectively. Tegner score did not improve significantly (0.76, 95% CI, -0.83 to 2.36, P = .35). Overall failure rate was 28% and reoperation rate was 19%. Increased age, previous surgery, and defect size positively correlated with increased risk of failure. Concomitant surgical procedures negatively correlated with failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, OAT showed successful outcomes in 72% of patients at long-term follow-up. Increased age, previous surgery, and defect size correlated positively with failure rate, whereas success improved with concomitant surgical procedures. Nonetheless, this systematic review is limited by heterogeneity in a surgical technique, lesion and patient characteristics, and reporting of nonstandardized outcome measures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
