Researchers have successfully healed knee injuries from nasal cartilage cells. This area has the particularity of regenerating very well.
An injury, and that’s the decline. When the knee is affected, the consequences are unforgiving. In Europe and the United States, 2 million people suffer from joint sequelae caused by trauma. Indeed, the cartilage of this joint regenerates poorly and slowly. A team from the University Hospital of Basel (Switzerland) may have found a lasting solution. His work, published in the journal The Lancet, suggest removing the cartilage from the nose. The first trial, carried out on 10 patients, delivers encouraging results.
The method presented by the Swiss team is based on autografting. The patients recruited for the study all suffered from the consequences of knee injuries. Aged 18 to 55, they agreed to have some cartilage removed from inside their nose. This area is known for its rapid regeneration. The researchers recovered a piece of tissue 6 millimeters in diameter. The harvested cells were exposed, for two weeks, to growth factors which allowed them to develop. Then, for another fortnight, the samples were placed in collagen. A cartilage of 30 mm by 40 emerged which allowed an implantation in the knee.
A minimally invasive method
The evaluation two years after the reconstruction is conclusive. Only one patient had to be operated again because of an injury while playing sports. The other nine all reported improvement in pain, mobility and quality of life. All without side effects. An MRI has also shown real progress. The cartilage has started to repair itself. Its characteristics are similar to those of the original fabric.
The result is all the more encouraging as the technique is minimally invasive. This is what greet in an associated comment Drs Nicole Rotter and Rolf Brenner. “Overall, this first trial in humans represents a major advance towards less invasive, cell-based techniques,” they write. In addition, age did not cause a difference in response to treatment. A use in cases of osteoarthritis could therefore be considered.
It now remains to transform the trial into studies on larger populations. This new approach should also be compared to existing treatments. A necessary step before considering an expansion of the practice.
.
