Abstract
Introduction: The main advantage of perforative techniques is their atraumatic, non-invasiveness and possibly being done under arthroscopic control. Purpose: This study aims to compare two methods of operative techniques in the treatment of chondral lesions of the knee. Materials and methods: The clinical study included 237 symptomatic patients with chondral defects from the period of 2010 – 2018. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The first group included 49 (32.11%) patients with arthroscopic micro-fractures. The second group included 54 (35.49%) patients with arthroscopic subchondral perforation (drilling). The term of follow-up was 36 months. Each patient had at least 4 documented follow-up visits. Results: Results from grading scales – Lysholm, KOS, MRI – scales, as well as our own scale for evaluating knee function (PS) scale, were documented in each patient's separate file. The average pre-operative Lysholm score was 41.5 ± 6.6 in the microfracture group and 43.0 ± 5.6 in the perforation group. At the 36th-month average, Lysholm's score increased to 86.9 ± 7.3 in the microfracture group and to 86.1 ± 6.6 in the perforation group. During the study, it was also found that a correlation exists between the received results and the age of the patient, the size of the chondral defect, and the tracking period. Conclusion: The effectiveness of osteoperforative techniques relies on many factors: the age of the patient, the size of the defect, and the tracking period. In the end, mesenchymal stimulation of chondrogenesis results in positive mid-term results in patients with small-sized chondral lesion.
Publisher
Peytchinski Publishing Ltd.