Advertisement

Sustained benefit of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis for hip cartilage repair in a recreational athletic population

  • Fritz Thorey
  • Michael-Alexander MalahiasEmail author
  • Dimitrios Giotis
HIP

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the clinical outcome of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) implementation for mid-sized chondral lesions of the acetabulum in young active patients, and assess their potential to resume an active lifestyle including return to recreational athletic activities.

Methods

Sixty-two patients with full-thickness mid-sized acetabular chondral lesions were studied. All patients who underwent an arthroscopic AMIC procedure for reconstruction of chondral defects were assessed pre-operatively and at least 2 years post-operatively using the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain.

Results

A significant improvement in all three scores at the time of follow-up was found. The mean HOOS improved from 58.8 ± 7.4 pre-operatively to 90.6 ± 7.1 at follow-up (p < 0.001) while the mean mHHS improved from 53.4 ± 6.6 to 82.4 ± 8.2 (p < 0.001). There was a significant decrease from 4.9 ± 1.1 pre-operatively to 1.1 ± 0.8 post-operatively (p < 0.001) in the VAS pain evaluation, indicating that the patients were satisfied with their relief of pain.

Conclusions

The AMIC procedure is an effective single-stage technique for the reconstruction of mid-size chondral defects of acetabulum in amateur athletes. This intervention enhanced the potential for patients to resume recreational athletic activities and the 2-year clinical outcome as evaluated by the HOOS, mHHS and VAS showed significant improvement over the pre-operative evaluations.

Keywords

AMIC Hip chondral defects Sports, arthroscopic surgery Cartilage repair Regeneration 

Notes

Author contributions

FT conducted the study, carried out all the operations and had the final checking of the manuscript. MM participated in drafting, critically revising and editing the manuscript, while he participated in the operations performed. DG participated in the conception and design of the study and in the interpretation of data, while he participated in the manuscript drafting and in the operations performed. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

No funding or other financial support was received in relation to this study.

Ethical approval

Prior to starting the study, the research protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board (IRB) of ATOS Clinic, Heidelberg, Germany (approval number 02/14).

Informed consent

All subjects were in agreement with the testing protocol and gave their informed consent for participation in accordance with our Institutional Review Board procedures.

References

  1. 1.
    Bardakos NV, Vasconcelos JC, Villar RN (2008) Early outcome of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: the role of a femoral osteoplasty in symptomatic improvement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:1570–1575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benthien JP, Behrens P (2010) Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC). A one-step procedure for retropatellar articular resurfacing. Acta Orthop Belg 76:260–263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bretschneider H, Trattnig S, Landgraeber S et al (2019) Arthroscopic matrix-associated, injectable autologous chondrocyte transplantation of the hip: significant improvement in patient-related outcome and good transplant quality in MRI assessment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05466-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chahla J, LaPrade RF, Mardones R, et al. (2016) Biological therapies for cartilage lesions in the hip: a new horizon. Orthopedics 1;39(4):15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cherubino P, Grassi FA, Bulgheroni P, Ronga M (2003) Autologous chondrocyte implantation using a bilayer collagen membrane: a preliminary report. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 11:10–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crawford K, Philippon MJ, Sekiya JK, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR (2006) Microfracture of the hip in athletes. Clin Sports Med 25:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Girolamo L, Jannelli E, Fioruzzi A, Fontana A (2018) Acetabular chondral lesions associated with femoroacetabular impingement treated by autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis or microfracture: a comparative study at 8-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 34(11):3012–3023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Erggelet C, Endres M, Neumann K et al (2009) Formation of cartilage repair tissue in articular cartilage defects pretreated with microfracture and covered with cell-free polymer-based implants. J Orthop Res 27:1353–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fontana A (2012) A novel technique for treating cartilage defects in the hip: a fully arthroscopic approach to using autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis. Arthrosc Tech 21(1):e63–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fontana A, Bistolfi A, Crova M, Rosso F, Massazza G (2012) Arthroscopic treatment of hip chondral defects: autologous chondrocyte transplantation versus simple debridement-a pilot study. Arthroscopy 28(3):322–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fontana A, de Girolamo L (2015) Sustained five-year benefit of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis for femoral acetabular impingement-induced chondral lesions compared with microfracture treatment. Bone Joint J 97(5):628–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jannelli E, Fontana A (2017) Arthroscopic treatment of chondral defects in the hip: AMIC, MACI, microfragmented adipose tissue transplantation (MATT) and other options. SICOT J 3:43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jerosch J, Schunck J, Khoja A (2006) Arthroscopic treatment of the hip in early and midstage degenerative joint disease. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:641–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jordan MA, Van Thiel GS, Chahal J, Nho SJ (2012) Operative treatment of chondral defects in the hip joint: a systematic review. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 5(3):244–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kemp JL, Collins NJ, Roos EM, Crossley KM (2013) Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for hip arthroscopic surgery. Am J Sports Med. 41(9):2065–2073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klässbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E (2003) Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol 32(1):46–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Körsmeier K, Claßen T, Kamminga M, Rekowski J, Jäger M, Landgraeber S (2016) Arthroscopic three-dimensional autologous chondrocyte transplantation using spheroids for the treatment of full-thickness cartilage defects of the hip joint. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(6):2032–2037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krueger DR, Gesslein M, Schuetz M, Perka C, Schroeder JH (2018) Injectable autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in acetabular cartilage defects-three-year results. J Hip Preserv Surg 5(4):386–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leunig M, Tibor LM, Naal FD, Ganz R, Seinwachs MR (2012) Surgical technique: Second-generation bone marrow stimulation via surgical dislocation to treat hip cartilage lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(12):3421–3431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lienert JJ, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR, Philippon MJ, Sekiya JK (2005) Microfracture techniques in hip arthroscopy. Oper Tech Orthop 15:267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Logan ZS, Redmond JM, Spelsberg SC, Jackson TJ, Domb BG (2016) Chondral lesions of the hip. Clin Sports Med. 35(3):361–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lubowitz JH, Poehling GG (2006) Hip arthroscopy: an emerging gold standard. Arthroscopy 22:1257–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Makhni EC, Stone AV, Ukwuani GC et al (2017) A critical review: management and surgical options for articular defects in the Hip. Clin Sports Med 36(3):573–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mancini D, Fontana A (2014) Five-year results of arthroscopic techniques for the treatment of acetabular chondral lesions in femoroacetabular impingement. Int Orthop 38(10):2057–2064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McCarthy JC (2004) The diagnosis and treatment of labral and chondral injuries. Instr Course Lect 53:573–577PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    McGill KC, Bush-Joseph CA, Nho SJ (2010) Hip microfracture: indications, technique, and outcomes. Cartilage 1:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Philippon MJ, Schenker ML, Briggs KK, Maxwell RB (2008) Can microfracture produce repair tissue in acetabular chondral defects? Arthroscopy 24:46–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Söderman P, Malchau H (2001) Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res 384:189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Steinwachs M, Kreuz PC (2007) Autologous chondrocyte implantation in chondral defects of the knee with a type I/III collagen membrane: a prospective study with a 3-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 23:381–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steinwachs MR, Guggi T, Kreuz PC (2008) Marrow stimulation techniques. Injury 39(suppl 1):S26–S31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stubbs AJ, Potter HG (2009) Section VII: chondral lesions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 91(Suppl 1):119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thier S, Weiss C, Fickert S (2017) Arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation in the hip for the treatment of full-thickness cartilage defects—a case series of 29 patients and review of the literature. SICOT J 3:72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Thorborg K, Roos EM, Bartels EM, Petersen J, Hölmich P (2010) Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 44(16):1186–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thorey F, Budde S, Ezechieli M, Albrecht UV, Ettinger M (2013) Feasibility of arthroscopic placement of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis grafts in the cadaver hip joint. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5(3):e26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tijssen M, van Cingel R, van Melick N, de Visser E (2011) Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of the psychometric evidence. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 12:117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vaughn ZD, Safran MR (2010) Arthroscopic femoral osteoplasty/chielectomy for cam-type femoroacetabular impingement in the athlete. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 18(2):90–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Xiang Y, Bunpetch V, Zhou W, Ouyang H (2019) Optimization strategies for ACI: a step-chronicle review. J Orthop Translat 17:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yen YM, Kocher MS (2010) Chondral lesions of the hip: microfracture and chondroplasty. Sports Med Arthrosc 18(2):83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fritz Thorey
    • 1
  • Michael-Alexander Malahias
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Dimitrios Giotis
    • 3
  1. 1.International Center for Hip, Knee and Foot Surgery (HKF)ATOS Clinic HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special SurgeryNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.General Hospital of Grevena, Region Military CampGrevenaGreece

Personalised recommendations