4.4 Article

Characteristics and associated factors of Klee cartilage lesions: preliminary baseline-data of more than 1000 patients from the German cartilage registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU)

Journal

ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY
Volume 136, Issue 6, Pages 805-810

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2432-x

Keywords

Knee; Cartilage; Arthroscopy; Registry; Multicenter

Funding

  1. Deutsche Arthrosehilfe e.V.
  2. Oscar-Helene-Stiftung

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Knee cartilage lesions are very frequent in arthroscopic surgery. This multi-center-study was aimed to evaluate the distribution and possible associated factors of these pathologies in more than 1000 patients. The German cartilage registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU) started in 2013. In this paper, we present the baseline-data (distribution of knee cartilage lesions and the demographic data) of more than 1000 cases since the registries' start-up. A total number of 47 centers were involved into this multicenter study. A total of 1071 patients primary were registered. Degenerative knees 629 times (61.8 %) and injured knees 302 times (29.6 %) were involved. In the remaining 89 knees (8.7 %) the genesis of cartilage lesions was unclear. Single defects were observed in 792 cases (77.6 %). Most frequently the medial femoral condyle or the patella was affected. In 78 knees (7.6 %) the main-defect was associated with a defect of the corresponding joint surface. In the remaining cases complex cartilage damages were found. Our results are in confirmation with other multicenter studies. But these former studies did not differentiate into traumatic and degenerative lesions. Furthermore no characteristics were given regarding to single, kissing or complex lesions. Thus this database will be a sufficient instrument for the investigation of the natural course of cartilage lesions, but above all about the effectiveness of different treatment options.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available