We have located links that may give you full text access.
Subsequent Surgery Up to 10 Years After Osteochondral Allograft and Osteochondral Autograft: An Analysis of More Than 2000 Patients.
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine 2022 December
BACKGROUND: Osteochondral allograft transplant (OCA) and osteochondral autograft transfer (OAT) replace damaged cartilage with a plug of bone and overlying articular cartilage; however, limited research is available regarding the survival of these osteoarticular grafting procedures.
HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that patients who underwent OCA would have a higher rate of subsequent surgery over the course of 5 years compared with patients who underwent OAT.
STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: The PearlDiver Mariner administrative database was used to identify patients 10 to 59 years old who had undergone OCA or OAT between 2010 and 2018. All included patients were assessed for subsequent knee surgeries, defined by the occurrence of a subsequent osteochondral procedure (OCA or OAT) or any type of knee arthroplasty for the duration of the time they were included in the data set (maximum of 10 years). Analyses were performed for the total population and those with allograft versus autograft (compared using the Fisher exact test). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival curves for operation-free survival were compared using a Mantel-Cox log-rank test.
RESULTS: In total, 2598 patients were identified: 1631 patients who underwent OCA (34.5 ± 12.1 years old; 51.6% female) and 967 patients who underwent OAT (32.1 ± 12.9 years old; 51.0% female). Both groups had similarly high rates of subsequent knee surgeries (23.9% vs 21.9%, respectively; P = .249), with no statistical differences in rates of subsequent surgery between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves comparing operation-free survival at 5 years indicated no significant difference between the groups (OCA, 88.0% vs OAT, 89.5%; P = .235).
CONCLUSION: Both osteochondral grafting procedures carried a relatively high rate of secondary surgery, which increased with time. The 5-year survival analysis revealed similarly high rates of subsequent surgery.
HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that patients who underwent OCA would have a higher rate of subsequent surgery over the course of 5 years compared with patients who underwent OAT.
STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: The PearlDiver Mariner administrative database was used to identify patients 10 to 59 years old who had undergone OCA or OAT between 2010 and 2018. All included patients were assessed for subsequent knee surgeries, defined by the occurrence of a subsequent osteochondral procedure (OCA or OAT) or any type of knee arthroplasty for the duration of the time they were included in the data set (maximum of 10 years). Analyses were performed for the total population and those with allograft versus autograft (compared using the Fisher exact test). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival curves for operation-free survival were compared using a Mantel-Cox log-rank test.
RESULTS: In total, 2598 patients were identified: 1631 patients who underwent OCA (34.5 ± 12.1 years old; 51.6% female) and 967 patients who underwent OAT (32.1 ± 12.9 years old; 51.0% female). Both groups had similarly high rates of subsequent knee surgeries (23.9% vs 21.9%, respectively; P = .249), with no statistical differences in rates of subsequent surgery between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves comparing operation-free survival at 5 years indicated no significant difference between the groups (OCA, 88.0% vs OAT, 89.5%; P = .235).
CONCLUSION: Both osteochondral grafting procedures carried a relatively high rate of secondary surgery, which increased with time. The 5-year survival analysis revealed similarly high rates of subsequent surgery.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app