Correlation and Comparative Evaluation of MOCART and MOCART 2.0 for Assessing Cartilage Repair

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Chondral and osteochondral lesions can lead to osteoarthritis if untreated, making accurate assessment of cartilage repair outcomes essential for optimizing treatment strategies. The objective of this study was to compare MOCART and MOCART 2.0 and to evaluate the clinical utility of both across different surgical cartilage repair techniques and various time points. <i>Material and Methods</i>: This study included 111 patients (age: 35 ± 10, 35% female) who underwent cartilage repair surgery of the knee between September 2015 and March 2022. A total of 188 postoperative magnetic resonance images were evaluated using MOCART and MOCART 2.0. The correlations between both scores, as well as to the change in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), were determined. <i>Results</i>: MOCART 2.0 scores (66 ± 13) were significantly higher than MOCART scores (58 ± 13, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Positive correlation was observed between scoring systems (r = 0.837, <i>p</i> < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between MOCART or MOCART 2.0 scores and the change in PROMs. Noticeably, there was a statistically significant correlation between both MOCART and MOCART 2.0 in the AutoCart subgroup across multiple timepoints for the change in PROMs. <i>Conclusions</i>: Based on radiographic-clinical outcome discordance, clinicians should not rely solely on MOCART or MOCART 2.0 scores when evaluating cartilage repair success but instead prioritize patient-reported functional improvements while using imaging as a complementary assessment tool.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61040745
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.67
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Correlation and Comparative Evaluation of MOCART and MOCART 2.0 for Assessing Cartilage Repair

Michael Leunig, Vincent A. Stadelmann, Gian M. Salzmann, Jakob Hax et al.
1 citations
Medicina
Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
1.67
article

Correlation and Comparative Evaluation of MOCART and MOCART 2.0 for Assessing Cartilage Repair

Michael Leunig, Vincent A. Stadelmann, Gian M. Salzmann, Jakob Hax, Louis Leuthard, Felix Conrad Oettl, Moritz Brunner, Stefan Preiß
article en
1 citations

Abstract

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Chondral and osteochondral lesions can lead to osteoarthritis if untreated, making accurate assessment of cartilage repair outcomes essential for optimizing treatment strategies. The objective of this study was to compare MOCART and MOCART 2.0 and to evaluate the clinical utility of both across different surgical cartilage repair techniques and various time points. <i>Material and Methods</i>: This study included 111 patients (age: 35 ± 10, 35% female) who underwent cartilage repair surgery of the knee between September 2015 and March 2022. A total of 188 postoperative magnetic resonance images were evaluated using MOCART and MOCART 2.0. The correlations between both scores, as well as to the change in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), were determined. <i>Results</i>: MOCART 2.0 scores (66 ± 13) were significantly higher than MOCART scores (58 ± 13, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Positive correlation was observed between scoring systems (r = 0.837, <i>p</i> < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between MOCART or MOCART 2.0 scores and the change in PROMs. Noticeably, there was a statistically significant correlation between both MOCART and MOCART 2.0 in the AutoCart subgroup across multiple timepoints for the change in PROMs. <i>Conclusions</i>: Based on radiographic-clinical outcome discordance, clinicians should not rely solely on MOCART or MOCART 2.0 scores when evaluating cartilage repair success but instead prioritize patient-reported functional improvements while using imaging as a complementary assessment tool.

MedicinaVol. 61(4)
Hospital for Special Surgery (US), University of Zurich (CH), Schulthess-Klinik (CH)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
1.67
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.