Reliability of the MOCART score: a systematic review

J Orthop Traumatol. 2021 Oct 6;22(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s10195-021-00603-w.

Abstract

Background: The present systematic review analysed the available literature to assess reliability of the Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) score in the evaluation of knee and ankle osteochondral lesions.

Methods: All the studies using the MOCART score for knee and/or talus chondral defects were accessed in March 2021. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess associations between the MOCART score at last follow-up and data of patients at baseline, clinical scores and complications. A multiple linear model regression analysis was used.

Results: The MOCART score evidenced no association with patient age (P = 0.6), sex (P = 0.1), body mass index (P = 0.06), defect size (P = 0.9), prior length of symptoms (P = 0.9) or visual analogue scale (P = 0.07). For chondral defects of the knee, no statistically significant association was found between the MOCART score and the International Knee Documentation Committee (P = 0.9) and with the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scales (P = 0.2), Tegner Activity Scale (P = 0.2), visual analogue scale P = 0.07), rate of failure (P = 0.2) and revision (P = 0.9). For chondral defect of the talus, no statistically significant associations were found between the MOCART score and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score (P = 0.3), Tegner Activity Scale (P = 0.4), visual analogue scale (P = 0.1), rate of failure (P = 0.1) and revision (P = 0.7).

Conclusion: The MOCART score demonstrated no association with patient characteristics and with the surgical outcome in patients who underwent surgical management for knee and talus chondral defects.

Level of evidence: Level IV.

Keywords: Chondral defect; Knee; MOCART; Talus.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Cartilage Diseases* / therapy
  • Humans
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging* / methods
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging* / statistics & numerical data
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Research Design