2008
DOI: 10.1097/jsa.0b013e318172b57e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In Search of a Gold Standard of Knee Cartilage Defect Topographical Documentation: “Freehand” Arthroscopic Mapping and Introduction of New Concepts

Abstract: Currently, a significant proportion of effort on cartilage tissue research is devoted to establishing the most effective method of inducing cartilage repair. However, the studies themselves lack uniform documentation and comparisons are difficult to make. If valuable therapeutic information is to be gained from future studies, it is important that an accurate system exists for assessing focal cartilage defects to allow comparison between studies and/or investigators.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Quantitative measurements are seldom possible and evaluation of the changes is mostly qualitative. When trying to estimate, e.g., distances in the knee joint, disagreements of the arthroscopic measurements are usually greater than 34 % ( Diaz and Albright 2008 ).…”
Section: Visual Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Quantitative measurements are seldom possible and evaluation of the changes is mostly qualitative. When trying to estimate, e.g., distances in the knee joint, disagreements of the arthroscopic measurements are usually greater than 34 % ( Diaz and Albright 2008 ).…”
Section: Visual Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quantitative measurements are seldom possible and evaluation of the changes is mostly qualitative. When trying to estimate, e.g., distances in the knee joint, disagreements of the arthroscopic measurements are usually greater than 34 % ( Diaz and Albright 2008 ). The ICRS and the OAS scoring systems both improve the arthroscopic evaluation of the repair tissue by offering semiquantitative data of filling of the lesion, integration of repair tissue with adjacent cartilage and the macroscopic appearance of the repair site.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%