Does progress in microfracture techniques necessarily translate into clinical effectiveness?

Figure 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis flow diagram of selection of studies included in the analysis. RCT: Randomized controlled trial.

Figure 2 Forest plot comparing the generations of microfracture for the functional outcomes reported at 1 year among the included studies in the network. 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; VAS: Visual Analog Scale; MFx: Microfracture; KOOS: Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale; IKDC: International Knee Documentation Committee; REML: Restricted maximum likelihood.

Figure 3 Forest plot comparing the generations of microfracture for the radiological outcomes reported at 1 year among the included studies in the network. 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; MFx: Microfracture; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; MOCART: Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue; REML: Restricted maximum likelihood.

Figure 4 Forest plot comparing the generations of microfracture for the functional and radiological outcomes at 2 years reported among the included studies in the network. 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; VAS: Visual Analog Scale; MFx: Microfracture; KOOS: Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale; IKDC: International Knee Documentation Committee; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; MOCART: Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue; REML: Restricted maximum likelihood.

Figure 5 Forest plot comparing the generations of microfracture for the functional outcomes reported at 5 years among the included studies in the network. 95%CI: 95% confidence interval; mFX: Microfracture; IKDC: International Knee Documentation Committee; REML: Restricted maximum likelihood.