Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up
Background: For large, locally restricted cartilage defects in young patients, third-generation matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) with a variety of scaffolds has shown good mid- to long-term results. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to monitor the clinical and radiologic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine 2021-01, Vol.9 (1), p.2325967120969237-2325967120969237, Article 2325967120969237 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2325967120969237 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 2325967120969237 |
container_title | Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine |
container_volume | 9 |
creator | Zak, Lukas Kleiner, Anne Albrecht, Christian Tichy, Brigitte Aldrian, Silke |
description | Background:
For large, locally restricted cartilage defects in young patients, third-generation matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) with a variety of scaffolds has shown good mid- to long-term results.
Purpose/Hypothesis:
This study aimed to monitor the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who received ACI at the knee joint using the Igor scaffold (IGOR–Institute for Tissue and Organ Reconstruction) at 2-year follow-up. Our hypothesis was that there would be improvements in postoperative subjective scores and cartilage repair tissue quality.
Study Design:
Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
A total of 21 patients (12 male and 9 female) were available for 2-year follow-up after third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold. All were clinically assessed using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Activity Scale, Brittberg score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Noyes Sports Activity Rating Scale, and visual analog scale for pain. For morphological evaluation, the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) and MOCART 2.0 scores were calculated using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results were compared between baseline and 24 months postoperatively.
Results:
After 2 years, the clinical and radiological scores showed good to excellent results in the majority of patients. On the IKDC, 10 patients were graded as excellent, 4 as good, 5 as fair, and 2 as severe; on the KOOS, 7 patients were graded as excellent, 8 as good, 4 as fair, and 2 as severe. From baseline to latest follow-up, visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5.6 ± 3.2 (mean ± SD) to 1.5 ± 2; KOOS results increased from 51 ± 20.7 to 75.2 ± 15.4; and the Tegner score improved from 2.2 ± 1.8 to 4.3 ± 1.3. The MOCART and MOCART 2.0 scores were comparable at 2-year follow-up, with mean values of 74 ± 10 and 78 ± 13, respectively. Satisfactory filling and integration were found in 90.5%. Overall, 16 of 21 patients (76.1%) were satisfied with the surgery and would undergo the procedure again.
Conclusion:
Third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold showed improvements in clinical and radiological results that were comparable with other scaffolds for patients with large traumatic or degenerative cartilage defects. Patients reported a decrease in pain and an increase in activity, with the majority reporting good results. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/2325967120969237 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_webof</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_webofscience_primary_000613117100001</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_2325967120969237</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2486427820</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-e1948607bfda48212ad405838e7f5db22a05e1e0a4edab2c76e1322862f5f08c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks9rFTEQxxdRbKm9e5KAF0FW82s3WQ_CY7H1acFDW8TTks3O7kvZl7wmWUvP_uNm3fqsBcFcEiaf-TIz38my5wS_IUSIt5TRoioFobgqK8rEo-xwDuVz7PG990F2HMIVTkcWpGLiaXbAWFEwzvFh9uNiY3yXn4IFr6JxFq2m6EY3uCmgeuNs552-jYDW292obFwYFVHcAPpsAdAnZ2xEl8HY4VdwPTiPzrXqezd279AK1SoAOgdvIKCvJm4Qzb-B8ujEjaO7yafds-xJr8YAx3f3UXZ58uGi_piffTld16uzXPOSxhxIxWWJRdt3iktKqOo4LiSTIPqiaylVuAACWHHoVEu1KIEwSmVJ-6LHUrOj7P2iu5vaLXQabPRqbHbebJW_bZwyzd8_1myawX1vhOSkrHASeHUn4N31BCE2WxM0jGkwkObVUC4FZwwXIqEvH6BXbvI2tTdTJadC0lkQL5T2LgQP_b4YgpvZ5OahySnlxf0m9gm_LU2AXIAbaF0ftAGrYY-lLSgJS9JkXghSm8XR2k02ptTX_5-a6HyhgxrgT3v_rPwn62bPWw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2486427820</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /></source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Zak, Lukas ; Kleiner, Anne ; Albrecht, Christian ; Tichy, Brigitte ; Aldrian, Silke</creator><creatorcontrib>Zak, Lukas ; Kleiner, Anne ; Albrecht, Christian ; Tichy, Brigitte ; Aldrian, Silke</creatorcontrib><description>Background:
For large, locally restricted cartilage defects in young patients, third-generation matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) with a variety of scaffolds has shown good mid- to long-term results.
Purpose/Hypothesis:
This study aimed to monitor the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who received ACI at the knee joint using the Igor scaffold (IGOR–Institute for Tissue and Organ Reconstruction) at 2-year follow-up. Our hypothesis was that there would be improvements in postoperative subjective scores and cartilage repair tissue quality.
Study Design:
Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
A total of 21 patients (12 male and 9 female) were available for 2-year follow-up after third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold. All were clinically assessed using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Activity Scale, Brittberg score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Noyes Sports Activity Rating Scale, and visual analog scale for pain. For morphological evaluation, the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) and MOCART 2.0 scores were calculated using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results were compared between baseline and 24 months postoperatively.
Results:
After 2 years, the clinical and radiological scores showed good to excellent results in the majority of patients. On the IKDC, 10 patients were graded as excellent, 4 as good, 5 as fair, and 2 as severe; on the KOOS, 7 patients were graded as excellent, 8 as good, 4 as fair, and 2 as severe. From baseline to latest follow-up, visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5.6 ± 3.2 (mean ± SD) to 1.5 ± 2; KOOS results increased from 51 ± 20.7 to 75.2 ± 15.4; and the Tegner score improved from 2.2 ± 1.8 to 4.3 ± 1.3. The MOCART and MOCART 2.0 scores were comparable at 2-year follow-up, with mean values of 74 ± 10 and 78 ± 13, respectively. Satisfactory filling and integration were found in 90.5%. Overall, 16 of 21 patients (76.1%) were satisfied with the surgery and would undergo the procedure again.
Conclusion:
Third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold showed improvements in clinical and radiological results that were comparable with other scaffolds for patients with large traumatic or degenerative cartilage defects. Patients reported a decrease in pain and an increase in activity, with the majority reporting good results.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2325-9671</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2325-9671</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/2325967120969237</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33553440</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Cartilage ; Hypotheses ; Knee ; Life Sciences & Biomedicine ; Orthopedics ; Pain ; Science & Technology ; Sport Sciences ; Sports medicine</subject><ispartof>Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021-01, Vol.9 (1), p.2325967120969237-2325967120969237, Article 2325967120969237</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Non-Commercial – No Derivatives License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021 2021 SAGE Publications</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>9</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000613117100001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-e1948607bfda48212ad405838e7f5db22a05e1e0a4edab2c76e1322862f5f08c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-e1948607bfda48212ad405838e7f5db22a05e1e0a4edab2c76e1322862f5f08c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8022-1417</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7841690/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7841690/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,729,782,786,866,887,2116,21973,27860,27931,27932,39265,44952,45340,53798,53800</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33553440$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zak, Lukas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleiner, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tichy, Brigitte</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aldrian, Silke</creatorcontrib><title>Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up</title><title>Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine</title><addtitle>ORTHOP J SPORTS MED</addtitle><addtitle>Orthop J Sports Med</addtitle><description>Background:
For large, locally restricted cartilage defects in young patients, third-generation matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) with a variety of scaffolds has shown good mid- to long-term results.
Purpose/Hypothesis:
This study aimed to monitor the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who received ACI at the knee joint using the Igor scaffold (IGOR–Institute for Tissue and Organ Reconstruction) at 2-year follow-up. Our hypothesis was that there would be improvements in postoperative subjective scores and cartilage repair tissue quality.
Study Design:
Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
A total of 21 patients (12 male and 9 female) were available for 2-year follow-up after third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold. All were clinically assessed using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Activity Scale, Brittberg score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Noyes Sports Activity Rating Scale, and visual analog scale for pain. For morphological evaluation, the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) and MOCART 2.0 scores were calculated using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results were compared between baseline and 24 months postoperatively.
Results:
After 2 years, the clinical and radiological scores showed good to excellent results in the majority of patients. On the IKDC, 10 patients were graded as excellent, 4 as good, 5 as fair, and 2 as severe; on the KOOS, 7 patients were graded as excellent, 8 as good, 4 as fair, and 2 as severe. From baseline to latest follow-up, visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5.6 ± 3.2 (mean ± SD) to 1.5 ± 2; KOOS results increased from 51 ± 20.7 to 75.2 ± 15.4; and the Tegner score improved from 2.2 ± 1.8 to 4.3 ± 1.3. The MOCART and MOCART 2.0 scores were comparable at 2-year follow-up, with mean values of 74 ± 10 and 78 ± 13, respectively. Satisfactory filling and integration were found in 90.5%. Overall, 16 of 21 patients (76.1%) were satisfied with the surgery and would undergo the procedure again.
Conclusion:
Third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold showed improvements in clinical and radiological results that were comparable with other scaffolds for patients with large traumatic or degenerative cartilage defects. Patients reported a decrease in pain and an increase in activity, with the majority reporting good results.</description><subject>Cartilage</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Science & Technology</subject><subject>Sport Sciences</subject><subject>Sports medicine</subject><issn>2325-9671</issn><issn>2325-9671</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks9rFTEQxxdRbKm9e5KAF0FW82s3WQ_CY7H1acFDW8TTks3O7kvZl7wmWUvP_uNm3fqsBcFcEiaf-TIz38my5wS_IUSIt5TRoioFobgqK8rEo-xwDuVz7PG990F2HMIVTkcWpGLiaXbAWFEwzvFh9uNiY3yXn4IFr6JxFq2m6EY3uCmgeuNs552-jYDW292obFwYFVHcAPpsAdAnZ2xEl8HY4VdwPTiPzrXqezd279AK1SoAOgdvIKCvJm4Qzb-B8ujEjaO7yafds-xJr8YAx3f3UXZ58uGi_piffTld16uzXPOSxhxIxWWJRdt3iktKqOo4LiSTIPqiaylVuAACWHHoVEu1KIEwSmVJ-6LHUrOj7P2iu5vaLXQabPRqbHbebJW_bZwyzd8_1myawX1vhOSkrHASeHUn4N31BCE2WxM0jGkwkObVUC4FZwwXIqEvH6BXbvI2tTdTJadC0lkQL5T2LgQP_b4YgpvZ5OahySnlxf0m9gm_LU2AXIAbaF0ftAGrYY-lLSgJS9JkXghSm8XR2k02ptTX_5-a6HyhgxrgT3v_rPwn62bPWw</recordid><startdate>20210101</startdate><enddate>20210101</enddate><creator>Zak, Lukas</creator><creator>Kleiner, Anne</creator><creator>Albrecht, Christian</creator><creator>Tichy, Brigitte</creator><creator>Aldrian, Silke</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8022-1417</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210101</creationdate><title>Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up</title><author>Zak, Lukas ; Kleiner, Anne ; Albrecht, Christian ; Tichy, Brigitte ; Aldrian, Silke</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-e1948607bfda48212ad405838e7f5db22a05e1e0a4edab2c76e1322862f5f08c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cartilage</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Life Sciences & Biomedicine</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Science & Technology</topic><topic>Sport Sciences</topic><topic>Sports medicine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zak, Lukas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleiner, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albrecht, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tichy, Brigitte</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aldrian, Silke</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zak, Lukas</au><au>Kleiner, Anne</au><au>Albrecht, Christian</au><au>Tichy, Brigitte</au><au>Aldrian, Silke</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up</atitle><jtitle>Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine</jtitle><stitle>ORTHOP J SPORTS MED</stitle><addtitle>Orthop J Sports Med</addtitle><date>2021-01-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>2325967120969237</spage><epage>2325967120969237</epage><pages>2325967120969237-2325967120969237</pages><artnum>2325967120969237</artnum><issn>2325-9671</issn><eissn>2325-9671</eissn><abstract>Background:
For large, locally restricted cartilage defects in young patients, third-generation matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) with a variety of scaffolds has shown good mid- to long-term results.
Purpose/Hypothesis:
This study aimed to monitor the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who received ACI at the knee joint using the Igor scaffold (IGOR–Institute for Tissue and Organ Reconstruction) at 2-year follow-up. Our hypothesis was that there would be improvements in postoperative subjective scores and cartilage repair tissue quality.
Study Design:
Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
A total of 21 patients (12 male and 9 female) were available for 2-year follow-up after third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold. All were clinically assessed using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Activity Scale, Brittberg score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Noyes Sports Activity Rating Scale, and visual analog scale for pain. For morphological evaluation, the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) and MOCART 2.0 scores were calculated using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results were compared between baseline and 24 months postoperatively.
Results:
After 2 years, the clinical and radiological scores showed good to excellent results in the majority of patients. On the IKDC, 10 patients were graded as excellent, 4 as good, 5 as fair, and 2 as severe; on the KOOS, 7 patients were graded as excellent, 8 as good, 4 as fair, and 2 as severe. From baseline to latest follow-up, visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5.6 ± 3.2 (mean ± SD) to 1.5 ± 2; KOOS results increased from 51 ± 20.7 to 75.2 ± 15.4; and the Tegner score improved from 2.2 ± 1.8 to 4.3 ± 1.3. The MOCART and MOCART 2.0 scores were comparable at 2-year follow-up, with mean values of 74 ± 10 and 78 ± 13, respectively. Satisfactory filling and integration were found in 90.5%. Overall, 16 of 21 patients (76.1%) were satisfied with the surgery and would undergo the procedure again.
Conclusion:
Third-generation ACI using the Igor scaffold showed improvements in clinical and radiological results that were comparable with other scaffolds for patients with large traumatic or degenerative cartilage defects. Patients reported a decrease in pain and an increase in activity, with the majority reporting good results.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>33553440</pmid><doi>10.1177/2325967120969237</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8022-1417</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2325-9671 |
ispartof | Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021-01, Vol.9 (1), p.2325967120969237-2325967120969237, Article 2325967120969237 |
issn | 2325-9671 2325-9671 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_webofscience_primary_000613117100001 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; PubMed Central |
subjects | Cartilage Hypotheses Knee Life Sciences & Biomedicine Orthopedics Pain Science & Technology Sport Sciences Sports medicine |
title | Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation at the Knee Joint Using the Igor Scaffold: A Case Series With 2-Year Follow-up |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-05T21%3A22%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_webof&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Third-Generation%20Autologous%20Chondrocyte%20Implantation%20at%20the%20Knee%20Joint%20Using%20the%20Igor%20Scaffold:%20A%20Case%20Series%20With%202-Year%20Follow-up&rft.jtitle=Orthopaedic%20journal%20of%20sports%20medicine&rft.au=Zak,%20Lukas&rft.date=2021-01-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=2325967120969237&rft.epage=2325967120969237&rft.pages=2325967120969237-2325967120969237&rft.artnum=2325967120969237&rft.issn=2325-9671&rft.eissn=2325-9671&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/2325967120969237&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_webof%3E2486427820%3C/proquest_webof%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2486427820&rft_id=info:pmid/33553440&rft_sage_id=10.1177_2325967120969237&rfr_iscdi=true |