Metrics of OsteoChondral Allografts (MOCA) Group Consensus Statements on the Use of Viable Osteochondral Allograft

Author:

Görtz Simon1,Tabbaa Suzanne M.2,Jones Deryk G.3,Polousky John D.4,Crawford Dennis C.5,Bugbee William D.,Cole Brian J.,Farr Jack,Fleischli James E.,Getgood Alan,Gomoll Andreas H.,Gross Allan E.,Krych Aaron J.,Lattermann Christian,Mandelbaum Bert R.,Mandt Peter R.,Mirzayan Raffy,Mologne Timothy S.,Provencher Matthew T.,Rodeo Scott A.,Safir Oleg,Strauss Eric D.,Wahl Christopher J.,Williams Riley J.,Yanke Adam B.,

Affiliation:

1. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

2. University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.

3. Ochsner Sports Medicine Institute, Jefferson, Louisiana, USA.

4. Children’s Health Andrews Institute for Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, Plano, Texas, USA.

5. Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

Abstract

Background: Osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation has evolved into a first-line treatment for large chondral and osteochondral defects, aided by advancements in storage protocols and a growing body of clinical evidence supporting successful clinical outcomes and long-term survivorship. Despite the body of literature supporting OCAs, there still remains controversy and debate in the surgical application of OCA, especially where high-level evidence is lacking. Purpose: To develop consensus among an expert group with extensive clinical and scientific experience in OCA, addressing controversies in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral defects with OCA transplantation. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: A focus group of clinical experts on OCA cartilage restoration participated in a 3-round modified Delphi process to generate a list of statements and establish consensus. Questions and statements were initially developed on specific topics that lack scientific evidence and lead to debate and controversy in the clinical community. In-person discussion occurred where statements were not agreed on after 2 rounds of voting. After final voting, the percentage of agreement and level of consensus were characterized. A systematic literature review was performed, and the level of evidence and grade were established for each statement. Results: Seventeen statements spanning surgical technique, graft matching, indications, and rehabilitation reached consensus after the final round of voting. Of the 17 statements that reached consensus, 11 received unanimous (100%) agreement, and 6 received strong (80%-99%) agreement. Conclusion: The outcomes of this study led to the establishment of consensus statements that provide guidance on surgical and perioperative management of OCAs. The findings also provided insights on topics requiring more research or high-quality studies to further establish consensus and provide stronger evidence.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3