Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term survival, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and radiographic results of matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte implantation (M-ACI) in adolescents with immature cartilage and compare them to adult controls. METHODS: A retrospective matched-pair analysis was performed comparing the PRO after M-ACI for focal cartilage defect of the knee in cartilaginous immature adolescents to mature adults. Groups were matched for sex, body mass index, defect site and size, symptom duration and the number of previous knee surgeries. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART 2.0) scores were assessed at least 60 months postoperatively. Patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) and clinical response rate in KOOS and KOOS subscores were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were matched. At a mean of 96 months (65-144 months), no surgical complications, graft hypertrophy or reoperations were noted in the cohorts studied. Adolescents showed superior PROs at the final follow-up (76.9 ± 14.1 vs. 66.4 ± 15.0, p = 0.03) and were significantly more likely to achieve PASS (74.1% vs. 55.6%; p = 0.02) compared to the adult cohort. The KOOS subscale analysis showed long-term benefits for adolescents in terms of symptom improvement, pain reduction, activities of daily living, sports and quality of life (p < 0.05). None of the patients in the adolescent group showed graft hypertrophy on magnet resonance imaging or signs of osteoarthritis on radiographs at long-term follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: M-ACI is an effective treatment for chondral defects of the knee in patients with immature cartilage with low revision rates and high patient satisfaction over the long term. Adolescents showed comparable clinical and radiographic results in the short and medium term, with slightly more favourable, clinically relevant functional results in adolescents in the long term. M-ACI can be safely used in adolescents, and consideration should be given to expanding the indication to include these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.