ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Sports Act. Living
Sec. Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation
This article is part of the Research TopicAdvancing Musculoskeletal Injury Management in Sports Medicine Through MRI InnovationsView all 5 articles
MRI Assessment of Autologous Osteochondral Transplantation in Talus: Correlation with Clinical Outcomes and Second look
Provisionally accepted- 1orthopedics, The Fifth Hospital of Wuhan, Wuhan, China
- 2Department of Hand and Microvascular Surgery, Shenzhen Hospital, Peking University, Shenzhen, China
- 3Department of Medical Imaging, Shenzhen Hospital, Peking University, Shenzhen, China
- 4Department of Sports Medicine, Shenzhen Hospital, Peking University, Shenzhen, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Autologous osteochondral transplantation (AOT) is an effective technique for treating complex osteochondral injuries of the talus. However, there is still controversy regarding the imaging assessment of its postoperative efficacy. MRI, as a non-invasive examination, is the primary method for evaluating surgical outcomes, while invasive secondary arthroscopic surgery provides a more direct and accurate evaluation of intra-articular results. The correlation between these two assessment methods and clinical outcomes remains unclear. Purpose: To evaluate the correlation between MRI findings assessed using the MOCART scoring system and functional outcomes, as well as arthroscopic second look, in patients undergoing (AOT) for osteochondral lesions of the talus. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 47 patients. All patients were followed for a minimum of two years postoperatively. Functional evaluations were performed at one and two years after surgery using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Imaging assessments utilized the Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) MRI scoring system. All patients underwent secondary arthroscopy for internal fixation removal at the two-year mark, during which the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) scores were recorded. Results: There was a low correlation between the MOCART scores and both functional scores and arthroscopic scores postoperatively. At one year post-surgery, the MOCART score showed a low correlation with the AOFAS score (r=0.27, p=0.07, 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.36). By two years post-surgery, the MOCART score demonstrated a low correlation with the AOFAS score (r=0.34, p=0.02, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.49), VAS score (r=-0.46, p<0.05, 95% CI: -0.08 to -0.02), and ICRS score (r=0.36, p<0.05, 95% CI: 0.40 to 3.11). ICRS and AOFAS scores (r = 0.56, p < 0.05, 95% CI: 1.19 to 3.07), indicating a moderate correlation. Conclusion: In autologous osteochondral transplantation (AOT) for the talus, the MOCART scores showed a low correlation with clinical function or secondary arthroscopic scores. The MRI assessment of talar cartilage repair requires more detailed evaluation. Level of Evidence:4
Keywords: Osteochondral Lesions, Talus, autologous osteochondral transplantation, Magnetic resonance, second-look arthroscopy
Received: 01 Jul 2025; Accepted: 24 Nov 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Liu, Chu, Zhou, Yan, Zhang, Chen and Bai. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Lu Bai
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
