Post-treatment Follow-up, Imaging, and Outcome Scores: Proceedings of the International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle
Authors: van Dijk Pim A. D. , Murawski Christopher D. , Hunt Kenneth J. , Andrews Carol L. , Longo Umile Giuseppe , McCollum Graham , Simpson Helene , Sofka Carolyn M. , Yoshimura Ichiro , Karlsson Jón , Ackermann Jakob , Adams Samuel B. , Angthong Chayanin , Batista Jorge P. , Baur Onno L. , Bayer Steve , Becher Christoph , Berlet Gregory C. , Boakye Lorraine A. T. , Brown Alexandra J. , Buda Roberto , Calder James D.F. , Canata Gian Luigi , Carreira Dominic S. , Clanton Thomas O. , Dahmen Jari , D’Hooghe Pieter , DiGiovanni Christopher W. , Dombrowski Malcolm E. , Drakos Mark C. , Ferkel Richard D. , Ferrao Paulo N. F. , Fortier Lisa A. , Glazebrook Mark , Giza Eric , Gomaa Mohamed , Görtz Simon , Haleem Amgad M. , Hamid Kamran S. , Hangody Laszlo , Hannon Charles P. , Haverkamp Daniel , Hertel Jay , Hintermann Beat , Hogan MaCalus V. , Hurley Eoghan T. , Kearns Stephen R. , Kennedy John G. , Kerkhoffs Gino M. M. J. , Kim Hak Jun , Kong Siu Wah , Labib Sameh A. , Lambers Kaj T. A. , Lee Jin Woo , Lee Keun Bae , Ling Jeffrey S. , Marangon Alberto , Mitchell Adam W. , Mittwede Peter N. , Nehrer Stefan , Niemeyer Philipp , Nunley James A. , O’Malley Martin J. , Osei-Hwedieh David O. , Paul Jochen , Pearce Christopher J. , Pereira Helder , Popchak Adam , Prado Marcelo P. , Raikin Steven M. , Reilingh Mikel L. , Rothrauff Benjamin B. , Schon Lew C. , Shimozono Yoshiharu , Smyth Niall A. , Spennacchio Pietro , Stone James W. , Sullivan Martin , Takao Masato , Tanaka Yasuhito , Thordarson David B. , Tuan Rocky , Valderrabano Victor , van Bergen Christiaan J.A. , van Dijk C. Niek , Vannini Francesca , Vaseenon Tanawat , Walther Markus , Wiewiorski Martin , Xu Xiangyang , Yasui Youichi , Yinghui Hua , Younger Alastair S. E. , Zhang Zijun 
Published: July 2018

Background:

The evidence supporting best practice guidelines in the field of cartilage repair of the ankle are based on both low quality and low levels of evidence. Therefore, an international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions based on the best available evidence on key topics within cartilage repair of the ankle. The purpose of this article is to report the consensus statements on Post-treatment Follow-up, Imaging and Outcome Scores developed at the 2017 International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle.

Methods:

Seventy-five international experts in cartilage repair of the ankle representing 25 countries and 1 territory were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Questions and statements were drafted within 11 working groups focusing on specific topics within cartilage repair of the ankle, after which a comprehensive literature review was performed and the available evidence for each statement was graded. Discussion and debate occurred in cases where statements were not agreed on in unanimous fashion within the working groups. A final vote was then held, and the strength of consensus was characterized as follows: consensus, 51% to 74%; strong consensus, 75% to 99%; unanimous, 100%.

Results:

A total of 12 statements on Post-treatment Follow-up, Imaging, and Outcome Scores reached consensus during the 2017 International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle. All 12 statements reached strong consensus (greater than 75% agreement).

Conclusions:

This international consensus derived from leaders in the field will assist clinicians with post-treatment follow-up, imaging, and outcome scores after management of a cartilage injury of the ankle in the general population. Moreover, healing, rehabilitation, and final outcomes can be optimized for the individual patient.