Reliability and Accuracy of the Outerbridge Classification in Staging of Cartilage Defects
Objective The decision on whether or not and how to treat a local cartilage defect is still made intraoperatively based on the visual presentation of the cartilage and findings from indentations with an arthroscopic probe. The treatment decision is then usually based on grading according to establis...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Orthopaedic surgery 2024-05, Vol.16 (5), p.1187-1195 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
The decision on whether or not and how to treat a local cartilage defect is still made intraoperatively based on the visual presentation of the cartilage and findings from indentations with an arthroscopic probe. The treatment decision is then usually based on grading according to established classifications systems, which, therefore, need to have high reliability and accuracy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the Outerbridge classification in staging cartilage defects.
Methods
We performed an observer arthroscopic study using the Outerbridge classification on seven fresh‐frozen human cadaveric knees, which collectively exhibited nine cartilage defects. To evaluate accuracy, defect severity was verified through histological examination. Interrater and intrarater reliabilites were calculated using Cohen's kappa and the intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC 3.1).
Results
The interrater and intrarater reliability for the Outerbridge classification ranged from poor to substantial, with 0.24 ≤ κ ≤ 0.70 and κ = 0.55 to κ = 0.66, respectively. The accuracy evaluated by comparison with the histological examination was 63% overall. The erroneous evaluations were, however, still often at the discrimination of grade 2 and 3. We did not find any relationship between higher experience and accuracy or intraobserver reliability. Taken together, these results encourage surgeons to further use diagnostic arthroscopy for evaluating cartilage lesions. Nevertheless, especially in grade 2 and 3, deviations from the histology were observed. This is, however, the point where a decision is made on whether to surgically address the defect or not.
Conclusion
Diagnostic arthroscopy is the standard for cartilage lesion assessment, yet interobserver reliability is fair to substantial. Caution is warranted in interpreting varied observer results. The accuracy of the “simpler” Outerbridge classification is insufficient compared to histological examinations, highlighting the need for improved techniques in guideline‐based intraoperative decision‐making.
Intraoperative decisions regarding cartilage defects rely on visual assessments and arthroscopic probe findings. Applying the Outerbridge classification to fresh‐frozen knees showed fair to substantial reliability, 63% overall accuracy, and challenges in defect grading. The “simpler” Outerbridge's accuracy falls short of histological examinations, emphasizing the need for improved g |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1757-7853 1757-7861 |
DOI: | 10.1111/os.14016 |