Metrics of OsteoChondral Allografts (MOCA) Group Consensus Statements on the Use of Viable Osteochondral Allograft. Issue 3 (18th March 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Görtz, Simon; Tabbaa, Suzanne M.; Jones, Deryk G.; Polousky, John D.; Crawford, Dennis C.; Bugbee, William D.; Cole, Brian J.; Farr, Jack; Fleischli, James E.; Getgood, Alan; Gomoll, Andreas H.; Gross, Allan E.; Krych, Aaron J.; Lattermann, Christian; Mandelbaum, Bert R.; Mandt, Peter R.; Mirzayan, Raffy; Mologne, Timothy S.; Provencher, Matthew T.; Rodeo, Scott A.; Safir, Oleg; Strauss, Eric D.; Wahl, Christopher J.; Williams, Riley J.; Yanke, Adam B.
• Is Part Of: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. Volume 9:Issue 3(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-03-18
• Subjects: articular cartilage -- osteochondritis dissecans -- allografts -- osteochondral allograft; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Arthroscopy -- Periodicals; Arthroplasty -- Periodicals; Knee -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.7
• DOI: 10.1177/2325967120983604
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2325-9671

Abstract

Background: Osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation has evolved into a first-line treatment for large chondral and osteochondral defects, aided by advancements in storage protocols and a growing body of clinical evidence supporting successful clinical outcomes and long-term survivorship. Despite the body of literature supporting OCAs, there still remains controversy and debate in the surgical application of OCA, especially where high-level evidence is lacking. Purpose: To develop consensus among an expert group with extensive clinical and scientific experience in OCA, addressing controversies in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral defects with OCA transplantation. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: A focus group of clinical experts on OCA cartilage restoration participated in a 3-round modified Delphi process to generate a list of statements and establish consensus. Questions and statements were initially developed on specific topics that lack scientific evidence and lead to debate and controversy in the clinical community. In-person discussion occurred where statements were not agreed on after 2 rounds of voting. After final voting, the percentage of agreement and level of consensus were characterized. A systematic literature review was performed, and the level of evidence and grade were established for each statement. Results: Seventeen statements spanning surgical technique, graft matching, indications, and rehabilitation reached consensus after the final round of voting. Of the 17 statements that reached consensus, 11 received unanimous (100%) agreement, and 6 received strong (80%-99%) agreement. Conclusion: The outcomes of this study led to the establishment of consensus statements that provide guidance on surgical and perioperative management of OCAs. The findings also provided insights on topics requiring more research or high-quality studies to further establish consensus and provide stronger evidence.