AIM To systematically review the results of studies looking at autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis(AMIC) in humans. METHODS A literature search was performed, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, to review any stud...AIM To systematically review the results of studies looking at autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis(AMIC) in humans. METHODS A literature search was performed, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, to review any studies using such techniques in humans. Our initial search retrieved 297 articles listed on MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CINHal and EMBASE. From these studies, 15 studies meeting the eligibility criteria were selected and formed the basis of our systematic review.RESULTS The study designs, surgical techniques and outcome measures varied between the studies. Although all studies reported improvements in patient outcome measures, this was not necessarily correlated with magnetic resonance imaging findings. Although there were many additional procedures performed, when AMIC was performed in isolation, the results tended to peak at 24 mo before declining. CONCLUSION Although short-term studies suggest improved patient reported outcomes with a variety of scaffolds, surgical techniques and rehabilitation regimes, the literature remains equivocal on whether the defect size and location, and patient factors affect the outcome. Patientbenefit appears to be maintained in the short-tomedium term but more high level studies with extensive and robust validated outcome measures should be conducted to evaluate the medium-and long-term effect of the AMIC procedure.展开更多
文摘AIM To systematically review the results of studies looking at autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis(AMIC) in humans. METHODS A literature search was performed, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, to review any studies using such techniques in humans. Our initial search retrieved 297 articles listed on MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CINHal and EMBASE. From these studies, 15 studies meeting the eligibility criteria were selected and formed the basis of our systematic review.RESULTS The study designs, surgical techniques and outcome measures varied between the studies. Although all studies reported improvements in patient outcome measures, this was not necessarily correlated with magnetic resonance imaging findings. Although there were many additional procedures performed, when AMIC was performed in isolation, the results tended to peak at 24 mo before declining. CONCLUSION Although short-term studies suggest improved patient reported outcomes with a variety of scaffolds, surgical techniques and rehabilitation regimes, the literature remains equivocal on whether the defect size and location, and patient factors affect the outcome. Patientbenefit appears to be maintained in the short-tomedium term but more high level studies with extensive and robust validated outcome measures should be conducted to evaluate the medium-and long-term effect of the AMIC procedure.
