Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2016 Jul-Sep;7(3):183-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2016.05.001. Epub 2016 Jun 15.

2016 barriers to cartilage restoration.

Author information

1
Cartilage Restoration Center of Indiana, OrthoIndy Hospital, Indianapolis, IN, United States; Orthopedic Surgery, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
2
Orthopedic Program, Center for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States; Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.

Abstract

Cartilage restoration has flourished since the 1990s. The early pioneering work included cell therapy by Peterson, marrow stimulation by Johnson, osteochondral autograft treatments by Hangody, and osteochondral allografts by Gross. Since those early days, many scientists and clinicians have created "variations on a theme", markedly expanding the potential options for treating patients with symptomatic chondral lesions. Nevertheless, a variety of barriers exist between these new cartilage products and their clinical applications. These barriers may be categorized as cost, regulatory, insurance, and logistical issues. While absolute solutions will remain elusive, the current goal is to define these barriers as the first step toward solving these problems.

KEYWORDS:

ACI, autologous chondrocyte implantation; AMIC, autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis; Cartilage; Cost; ICRS, International Cartilage Repair Society; Insurance; Logistics; MACI, matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation; NICE, United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; QALY, quality-adjusted life year; RCTs, randomized controlled trials; Regulation

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center