Purpose To determine whether microfracture with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) improves functional outcome and cartilage regeneration better than microfracture alone in patients undergoing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) for medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis (OA). Methods Among 436 patients treated with HTO for medial unicompartmental OA with varus deformity between 2010 and 2016, clinical outcomes were retrospectively compared between the microfracture alone group (group I, 43 cases) and microfracture with BMAC augmentation group (group II, 48 cases). Of these, 64 patients underwent a second-look arthroscopic assessment. Clinical outcomes were compared based on the Knee Society Score (KSS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC). Cartilage regeneration was assessed according to Koshino's staging system and the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) Cartilage Repair Assessment (CRA) grading system. Results At the last follow-up, there were no signiicant intergroup diferences in terms of KSS for pain and function (p > 0.05). Moreover, WOMAC scores were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Regarding second-look arthroscopy indings, according to Koshino's staging system, there was no signiicant intergroup diference in terms of defect coverage (p = 0.187). However, group II showed a signiicantly better mean CRA score than group I (p = 0.035). Conclusion There were no signiicant diferences in clinical outcomes and cartilage regeneration between the groups. However, the CRA score was signiicantly higher with BMAC augmentation and microfracture than microfracture alone. Therefore, BMAC augmentation had a synergistic efect for a better cartilage regeneration, although studies with a longer follow-up might help to conirm whether microfracture with BMAC augmentation would ensure better clinical outcomes than microfracture alone for the treatment of knee OA.
The immunomodulatory effects of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) on macrophages have been reported, however, the underlying mechanism remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the anti-inflammatory effects of MSCs on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated macrophages and the subsequent downregulation of their inflammatory mediators. Macrophages were treated with conditioned media from MSCs, without a subsequent change of MSCs responding to the inflammation state. This study also evaluated whether the interleukin (IL) 4 stimulation of MSCs can improve their anti-inflammatory effects. Results demonstrated that the MSC-conditioned medium (MSC-CM) stimulated with IL4 significantly inhibited inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) protein expression of LPS-activated macrophages. MSC-CM treatment inhibited the mRNA transcription of the cytokines IL1β and IL6, the chemokines C–C motif ligand (CCL) 2, CCL3, CCL4, and CCL5, and the chemokine receptors CCR2 and CCR5, in LPS-stimulated macrophages. As revealed through western blot and immunofluorescence analyses, the phosphorylation of p38, JNK, and ERK MAPKs, as well as phosphorylation of NF-κB in stimulated macrophages, were also inhibited by the MSC-CM. Further, more potent anti-inflammatory effects were observed with the IL4-stimulated cells, compared with those observed with the non-stimulated cells. The MSC-CM demonstrated a potent anti-inflammatory effect on LPS-activated macrophages, while the IL4 stimulation improved this effect. These findings indicate that MSCs could exert anti-inflammatory effects on macrophages, and may be considered as a therapeutic agent in inflammation treatment.
BackgroundWe aimed to evaluate clinical and radiological results after simultaneous open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in patients with ACL deficiency combined with medial uni-compartmental osteoarthritis (OA) and varus deformity.MethodsThis retrospective study was performed using data collected from 2005 to 2011 on a total of 24 patients who were diagnosed with ACL injury and medial unicompartmental OA with varus deformity, and who subsequently underwent simultaneous open-wedge HTO and arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. The mean follow-up duration was 5.2 years. For clinical outcomes, we evaluated Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, range of motion, Lachmann test, and pivot-shift test, and for radiological outcomes, we evaluated the degree of varus deformity, progression of medial OA, tibial posterior slope, anterior instability, and postoperative complication.ResultsThere were no limitations in range of motion found in any cases. Three patients showed progressive osteoarthritis on the medial compartment. The mechanical femorotibial angle was significantly corrected from varus 7.0 degrees to valgus 1.2 degrees, and the tibial posterior slope was not significantly changed. The Lysholm and Tegner activity scores were significantly improved after surgery (from 58 to 94 points on the Lysholm scale and from 4.0 to 5.3 points on the Tegner activity scale). Although the Lachman test and the pivot-shift test showed significant improvements after surgery, instability greater than Gr II was observed in three patients on the Lachman test and in four patients on the pivot-shift test. The side-to-side difference improved from 9.6 mm to 4.2 mm postoperatively as assessed using a Telos® arthrometer. There were no cases of nonunion or fixation loss.ConclusionsSimultaneous open-wedge HTO and ACL reconstruction in patients with ACL injury with medial compartmental OA showed satisfactory functional outcomes and postoperative activity level scores. However, some patients showed residual instability and progression of OA.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2161-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.