Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to introduce the MOCART 2.0 ankle score and evaluate its utility and reproducibility for the radiological assessment of cartilage repair tissue in the ankle joint. METHODS: The MOCART 2.0 ankle score evaluates seven individual variables, including "volume fill of (osteo)chondral defect," "Integration into adjacent cartilage and bone," "surface of the repair tissue," "signal intensity of the repair tissue," "bony defect and bony overgrowth," "presence of edema-like-marrow signal," and "presence of subchondral cysts." Overall, a MOCART 2.0 ankle score between 0 and 100 points may be reached. Two independent readers assessed the 3-T MRI examinations of 48 ankles, who had undergone cartilage repair of a talar cartilage defect using the new MOCART 2.0 ankle score. One of the readers performed two readings. Intra- and interrater reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the overall MOCART 2.0 ankle score. RESULTS: Forty-eight ankles (mean age at surgery 30.2 ± 11.2 years) were evaluated. The overall interrater (ICC = 0.75; 95%CI 0.60-0.85), as well as the intrarater (ICC = 0.83; 95%CI 0.72-0.90) reliability of the MOCART 2.0 ankle score was good. For individual variables the interrater reliability ranged from a kappa value of 0.29 (95%CI 0.01-0.57) for "surface of the repair tissue" to 0.83 (95%CI 0.71-0.95) for "presence of subchondral cysts". CONCLUSIONS: The newly introduced MOCART 2.0 ankle score, which encompasses the distinct anatomy of the ankle joint, demonstrates good intra- and interrater reliability. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The newly introduced MOCART 2.0 ankle score may facilitate the standardized assessment of cartilage repair in the ankle joint and allow an objective comparison of the morphological outcome between alternative treatment options and between different studies. KEY POINTS: This study introduces the MOCART 2.0 ankle score. The MOCART 2.0 ankle score demonstrated good intra- and interrater reliability. Standardized reporting may improve communication between radiologists and other physicians.