Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of defect size, orientation, and location on subchondral bone contact in oval-shaped experimental articular cartilage defects in a bovine knee model

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Chondral defects of the knee may lead to pain and disability, often requiring surgical intervention. The purpose of this study was to identify how size, location, and orientation influences subchondral bone contact within oval-shaped chondral defects.

Methods

Full-thickness defects were created in twelve bovine knees. Defect orientation was randomized between coronal and sagittal planes on both the medial and lateral femoral condyles (MFC and LFC). In extension, knees were statically loaded to 1,000 N. Area measurements were recorded using Tekscan sensors and I-Scan software. A MATLAB program computed defect area and the area within the defect demonstrating subchondral bone contact.

Results

Defect area, location, and orientation each had a significant effect on subchondral bone contact (p < 0.001), and significant interactions were found between defect area and both location and orientation. The size threshold (cm2) at which significant contact occurred on the subchondral bone within the defect was smallest for LFC/coronal defects (0.73 cm2), then LFC/sagittal (1.14 cm2), then MFC/coronal (1.61 cm2), and then MFC/sagittal (no threshold reached).

Conclusions

Intra-articular location and orientation of a femoral condyle chondral defect, in addition to area, significantly influence femoral subchondral bone contact within the defect and the threshold at which subchondral bone contact occurs within the defect. The parameters of defect location and shape orientation supplement current surgical algorithms to manage knee articular cartilage surgery. This may indicate different cartilage restorative procedures based on the effect on the subchondral bone from the defect geometry itself and the selected cartilage surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alford J, Cole B (2005) Cartilage restoration. Part 2. Techniques, outcomes, and future directions. Am J Sports Med 33(3):443–460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alford J, Lewis P, Kang R, Cole B (2005) Rapid progression of chondral disease in the lateral compartment of the knee following meniscectomy. Arthroscopy 21(12):1505–1509

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Athanasiou K, Rosenwasser M, Buckwalter J, Malinin T, Mow V (1991) Interspecies comparisons of in situ intrinsic mechanical properties of distal femoral cartilage. J Orthop Res 9(3):330–340

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown T, Pope D, Hale J, Buckwalter J, Brand R (1991) Effect of osteochondral defect size on cartilage contact stress. J Orthop Res 9:559–567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burr D, Radin E (2003) Microfractures and microcracks in subchondral bone: are they relevant to osteoarthrosis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 29:675–685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cole B, Pascual-Garrido C, Grumet R (2009) Surgical management of articular cartilage defects in the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:1778–1790

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Convery F, Akeson W, Keown G (1972) The repair of large osteochondral defects: an experimental study in horses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 82:253–262

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Flanigan DC, Harris JD, Brockmeier PM, Siston RA (2010) The effects of lesion size and location on subchondral bone contact in experimental knee articular cartilage defects in a bovine model. Arthroscopy 26(12):1655–1661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gomoll AH, Madry H, Knutsen G, van Dijk N, Seil R, Brittberg M, Kon E (2010) The subchondral bone in articular cartilage repair: current problems in the surgical management. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(4):434–447

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Guettler J, Demetropoulos C, Yang K, Jurist K (2004) Osteochondral defects in the human knee-influence of defect size on cartilage rim stress and load redistribution to surrounding cartilage. Am J Sports Med 32(6):1451–1458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heir S, Nerhus TK, Rotterud JH, Loken S, Ekeland A, Engebretsen L, Aroen A (2010) Focal cartilage defects in the knee impair quality of life as much as severe osteoarthritis: a comparison of knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score in 4 patient categories scheduled for knee surgery. Am J Sports Med 38(2):231–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Henderson I, LaValette D (2005) Subchondral bone overgrowth in the presence of full-thickness cartilage defects in the knee. Knee 12:435–440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman M (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(8):1189–1195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jackson D, Lalor P, Aberman H, Simon T (2001) Spontaneous repair of full-thickness defects of articular cartilage in a goat model—a preliminary study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83(1):53–64

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koo S, Andriacchi T (2007) A comparison of the influence of global functional loads versus local contact anatomy on articular cartilage thickness at the knee. J Biomech 40:2961–2966

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kreuz P, Steinwachs M, Erggelet C, Krause S, Konrad G, Uhl M, Sudkamp N (2006) Results after microfracture of full-thickness chondral defects in different compartments in the knee. Osteoarthr Cartil 14:1119–1125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lefkoe T, Trafton P, Ehrlich M, Walsh W, Dennehy D, Barrach H, Akelman E (1993) An experimental model of femoral condylar defect leading to osteoarthrosis. J Orthop Trauma 7(5):458–467

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Madry H (2010) The subchondral bone: a new frontier in articular cartilage repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(4):417–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Martelli S, Pinskerova V (2002) The shapes of the tibial and femoral articular surfaces in relation to tibiofemoral movement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 4:607–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mina C, Garrett W, Pietrobon R, Glisson M, Higgins L (2008) High tibial osteotomy for unloading osteochondral defects in the medial compartment of the knee. Am J Sports Med 36(5):949–955

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Minas T, Gomoll A, Rosenberger R, Royce R, Bryant T (2009) Increased failure rate of autologous chondrocyte implantation after previous treatment with marrow-stimulation techniques. Am J Sports Med 37:902–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Minas T, Nehrer S (1997) Current concepts in the treatment of articular cartilage defects. Orthopedics 20(6):525–538

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mithoefer K, Williams R, Warren R, Potter H, Spock C, Jones E, Wickiewicz T, Marx R (2005) The microfracture technique for the treatment of articular cartilage lesions in the knee. A prospective cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(9):1911–1920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nelson B, Anderson D, Brand R, Brown T (1988) Effect of osteochondral defects on articular cartilage: contact pressures studied in dog knees. Acta Orthop Scand 59(5):574–579

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nugent-Derfus GE, Takara T, O’Neill JK, Cahill SB, Gortz S, Pong T, Inoue H, Aneloski NM, Wang WW, Vega KI, Klein TJ, Hsieh-Bonassera ND, Bae WC, Burke JD, Bugbee WD, Sah RL (2007) Continuous passive motion applied to whole joints stimulates chondrocyte biosynthesis of PRG4. Osteoarthr Cartil 15(5):566–574

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Paletta G, Manning T, Snell E, Parker R, Bergfeld J (1997) The effect of allograft meniscal replacement on intraarticular contact area and pressures in the human knee—a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med 25(5):692–698

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pape D, Filardo G, Kon E, Van Dijk N, Madry H (2010) Disease-specific clinical problems associated with the subchondral bone. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(4):448–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Radin E, Rose R (1986) Role of subchondral bone in the initiation and progression of cartilage damage. Clin Orthop Relat Res 213:34–40

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Scott W (2005) Insall and Scott Surgery of the Knee, 4th edn. Churchill Livingstone, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shapiro F, Koide S, Glimcher M (1993) Cell origin and differentiation in the repair of full-thickness defects of articular cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75(4):532–553

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Thambyah A, Broom N (2009) On new bone formation in the pre-osteoarthritic joint. Osteoarthr Cartil 17:456–463

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wu JZ, Herzog W, Hasler EM (2002) Inadequate placement of osteochondral plugs may induce abnormal stress–strain distributions in articular cartilage—finite element simulations. Med Eng Phys 24(2):85–97

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Alan Litsky, M.D., Sc.D., for his assistance in experimental design and use of his laboratory. The authors received no external funding support for this study. The authors received internal funding support from the Department of Orthopaedics at The Ohio State University. One of the authors (DCF) is on the speaker’s bureau for Genzyme Corporation, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cartilage Restoration Program, Sports Health and Performance Institute, The Ohio State University Sports Medicine Center, 2050 Kenny Road, Suite 3100, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA

    David C. Flanigan, Joshua D. Harris & Robert A. Siston

  2. Department of Orthopaedics, The Ohio State University, 2050 Kenny Road, Suite 3100, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA

    David C. Flanigan, Joshua D. Harris & Robert A. Siston

  3. Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

    Peter M. Brockmeier, Rebecca L. Lathrop & Robert A. Siston

Authors
  1. David C. Flanigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua D. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter M. Brockmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rebecca L. Lathrop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert A. Siston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David C. Flanigan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Flanigan, D.C., Harris, J.D., Brockmeier, P.M. et al. The effects of defect size, orientation, and location on subchondral bone contact in oval-shaped experimental articular cartilage defects in a bovine knee model. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 174–180 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2342-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2342-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation