Diagnosis: History, Physical Examination, Imaging, and Arthroscopy: Proceedings of the International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle
Authors: van Bergen Christiaan J. A. , Baur Onno L. , Murawski Christopher D. , Spennacchio Pietro , Carreira Dominic S. , Kearns Stephen R. , Mitchell Adam W. , Pereira Helder , Pearce Christopher J. , Calder James D. F. , Ackermann Jakob , Adams Samuel B. , Andrews Carol L. , Angthong Chayanin , Batista Jorge P. , Bayer Steve , Becher Christoph , Berlet Gregory C. , Boakye Lorraine A. T. , Brown Alexandra J. , Buda Roberto , Canata Gian Luigi , 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. , Hunt Kenneth J. , Hurley Eoghan T. , Karlsson Jón , 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. , Longo Umile Giuseppe , Marangon Alberto , McCollum Graham , Mittwede Peter N. , Nehrer Stefan , Niemeyer Philipp , Nunley James A. , O’Malley Martin J. , Osei-Hwedieh David O. , Paul Jochen , Popchak Adam , Prado Marcelo P. , Raikin Steven M. , Reilingh Mikel L. , Rothrauff Benjamin B. , Schon Lew C. , Shimozono Yoshiharu , Simpson Helene , Smyth Niall A. , Sofka Carolyn M. , Stone James W. , Sullivan Martin , Takao Masato , Tanaka Yasuhito , Thordarson David B. , Tuan Rocky , Valderrabano Victor , van Dijk C. Niek , van Dijk Pim A.D. , Vannini Francesca , Vaseenon Tanawat , Walther Markus , Wiewiorski Martin , Xu Xiangyang , Yasui Youichi , Yinghui Hua , Yoshimura Ichiro , 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 “Diagnosis: History, Physical Examination, Imaging, and Arthroscopy” 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 upon in unanimous fashion within the working groups. A final vote was then held, and the strength of consensus was characterized as follows: consensus: 51 - 74%; strong consensus: 75 - 99%; unanimous: 100%.

Results:

A total of 12 statements on the diagnosis of cartilage injuries of the ankle reached consensus during the 2017 International Consensus Meeting on Cartilage Repair of the Ankle. Two achieved unanimous support and 10 reached strong consensus (greater than 75% agreement). All statements reached at least 86% agreement.

Conclusions:

This international consensus derived from leaders in the field will assist clinicians in the diagnosis of cartilage injuries of the ankle.