Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Research Articles

Failure and complication rates following meniscal all-inside and inside-out repairs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study examines failure rates, complication rates and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for meniscal all-inside (AI) and inside-out (IO) repair techniques. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase and Cochrane (inception to January 2024) assessing for Level I-III studies evaluating outcomes after meniscal repair. The primary outcome regarded differences in failure rates between AI and IO repair techniques. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of complication rates and PROMs. Quality assessment was performed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. A meta-analysis was conducted for outcomes reported by more than three comparative studies. A total of 24 studies (13 studies and 912 menisci for AI vs. 17 studies and 1,117 menisci for IO) were included. The mean follow-up ranges were 22-192 months (AI) and 18.5-155 months (IO). The overall reported AI failure rate ranged from 5% to 35% compared to 0% to 25% within the IO group. When comparing meniscal repair failure rates in the setting of concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the AI group had a failure rate (AI: 5%-34%; IO: 0%-12.9%). The complication rate ranged from 0% to 40% for AI and 0% to 20.5% for IO. Post-operative PROM scores ranged from 81.2 to 93.8 (AI) versus 89.6 to 94 (IO) for IKDC and 4.0-7.02 (AI) versus 4.0-8.0 (IO) for Tegner. Upon pooling of six comparative studies, a significantly lower failure rate favouring the IO technique was observed (15.9% AI vs. 11.1% IO; p = 0.02), although this result was influenced by a study with a predominantly elite athlete population. Moreover, no significant differences were found regarding complication rates between cohorts (7.3% AI vs. 4.8% IO; p = 0.86). The present study underscores comparable clinical success between AI and IO meniscal repair techniques, with both techniques demonstrating similar complication rates. However, the AI repair technique was associated with 1.77 times higher odds of failure compared to the IO cohort. Level III.

Reoperation Rates of Meniscal Repair Are Associated With a Higher Reoperation Rate Than Meniscectomy in Patients Aged 40 and Older

To compare the long-term reoperation rates of meniscectomy and meniscal repair and to determine patient and surgical factors associated with earlier reoperation among patients ≥40 years. A retrospective study was conducted using the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2020. Patients 40 and older who received a meniscectomy or a meniscal repair with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included. The primary outcome was ipsilateral knee reoperation during the study period. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to determine differences in reoperation rates for meniscal repair and meniscectomy over time. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with earlier time to reoperation. A total of 3,026 patients (2,367 meniscectomy, 659 meniscal repair) were included. Mean follow-up was 14.5 ± 0.29 years (range, 1.0-14.91 years). There were no significant differences in baseline demographic characteristics of follow-up between the 2 groups. The survival curves of the 2 procedures significantly differed (P= .02), and the overall reoperation rate was higher after meniscal repair than meniscectomy (13.5% vs 10.1%, P= .01). However, the incidence of subsequent ipsilateral meniscectomy, meniscal repair, and knee arthroplasty procedures did not significantly differ. Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified meniscal repair, obesity, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and increasing age as being significant risks for earlier reoperation, and male sex was protective. In a population of patients aged ≥40 with surgically treated meniscal tears and 14.5-year average follow-up, meniscal repair was associated with higher overall reoperation with shorter survival times compared to meniscectomy. However, the indications for the 2 procedures likely differed. Additionally, obesity, older age, female sex, and concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were risk factors for earlier reoperation. Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Comparison of Subsequent Surgery After Repair in Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears and Meniscectomy Analysis of a Large, Contained Cohort Study.

Bucket-handle meniscal tears are large longitudinal vertical meniscal tears that have an attached fragment flipped into the intercondylar notch. Meniscal repair attempts to restore the function of the meniscus and aims to preserve joint mechanics. Alternatively, meniscectomy results in quicker recovery but may lead to future degeneration. To evaluate the long-term risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery in patients who underwent a bucket-handle meniscal repair (BHMR) versus meniscectomy/bucket-handle meniscal debridement (BHMD) and assess risk factors associated with subsequent knee surgical intervention. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. An electronic health records search for all patients who underwent arthroscopic knee meniscal surgery (repair and meniscectomy) between 2011 and 2018 was performed. Natural language processing was used to search for terms of interest in the long operative notes to determine whether these surgeries were performed for bucket-handle meniscal tears. These patients comprised our initial cohort. Study patients were followed for at least 1 year and for up to 5 years (until December 31, 2019), with censoring at death or membership disenrollment. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes were evaluated via a database review. The primary outcome was subsequent ipsilateral knee surgeries and secondary outcomes included contralateral knee surgeries, deep surgical site infections, and venous thrombotic events. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to model for subsequent surgical treatment of the ipsilateral knee. A subset analysis for patients aged 30 to 50 years was then performed. The median follow-up time was 52.4 months (interquartile range [IQR], 33.5-60 months). A total of 1359 patients underwent BHMR and 1537 patients underwent BHMD. The median age was 24 years (IQR, 17-34 years) for the BHMR versus 38 years (IQR, 27-47 years) for the BHMD group (P < .001). Body mass index (BMI) was significantly lower in the BHMR group compared with the BHMD group (P < .001). BHMR was significantly more likely to be performed during a concomitant ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) than a BHMD (44.2% vs 30.1%, P < .001). During the follow-up period, a total of 656 subsequent ipsilateral procedures were performed in 393 (13.6%) patients. Patients who underwent initial BHMR were at a significantly higher risk of undergoing subsequent meniscal repair (4.3% vs 1%, P < .001), meniscectomy (12.1% vs 3.3%, P < .001), and ACLR (7.4% vs 2.9%, P < .001) compared with those who underwent BHMD. Multivariable analysis showed that BHMR, younger age, and lower BMI were risk factors for subsequent ipsilateral surgery. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, subset analysis showed that for patients aged 30 to 50 years, undergoing a BHMR versus a BHMD led to a 2.3-fold higher risk of subsequent surgery, a 5.3-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscal repair and a 3.2-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscectomy. BHMR was more often performed in younger patients with a lower BMI, especially during a concomitant ACLR. Patients treated with BHMR were more likely to undergo subsequent surgeries, with the likelihood decreasing with increasing age. Subset analyses showed increasing risk for subsequent surgeries with BHMR versus BHMD in the cohort consisting of patients aged 30 to 50 years.

Fibrin clot augmentation of high-risk meniscal repairs may result in clinical healing in up to 90% of cases

ObjectiveWhile meniscal repair is preferable to meniscectomy, some cases may be at higher risk of failure if repaired. Incorporating fibrin clot (FC) into the repair has been proposed to improve healing rates. The purpose of this study was to determine the failure rates, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications of FC augmented meniscal repair for cases considered to be at higher risk of failure. MethodsA retrospective case series of all patients undergoing FC augmented repair of isolated meniscus tears between January 2016 and September 2021 was undertaken. All cases were thought be at higher risk of failure; they included chronic, radial, complex, horizontal cleavage, and tears not in the red–red zone. Patients were excluded if they had a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or if the repair was done through an open incision. The primary outcome was clinical failure defined as further repair or debridement. Secondary outcomes were PROMs and surgical complications. PROMs collected were Lysholm score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Oxford Knee Score and the Tegner score. ResultsFifty one inside-out meniscal repairs using FC were performed in 50 patients (62% male). The mean age was 34 years (range 14–70). The median time from injury to repair was 122 days (range 4–1565). The medial meniscus was repaired in 63% of cases. Tear types included radial (31%) and complex (39%) and 71% of cases included repair of the white–white zone. 16% of cases were revision meniscal repairs. FC was used in 43% of isolated meniscal repairs during the study period. All patients were followed up to a median of 46 months (range 22–87 months). PROMs at a median of 30 months post-operatively showed statistically significant improvements. Five patients (10%) underwent further surgery for failure after median 21 months. Two patients (4%) reported sensory disturbance around their skin wounds, no other complications were reported. 13% of medial meniscal repairs failed, whereas only 5% of lateral meniscal repairs failed (p ​= ​0.4). ConclusionsFC augmented meniscal repair performed for tears considered to be at higher risk of failure may result in acceptably low rates of clinical failure. Level of evidenceLevel IV, case series.

Poster 303: Outcomes Following Repair of Radial Meniscus Tears Compared to Bucket Handle Meniscus Tears

Objectives: Preserving the meniscus has become a priority in managing meniscal tears with advancement of meniscus repair techniques. Meniscal repair, as opposed to partial meniscectomy, reduces risk of development and progression of knee osteoarthritis. Radial meniscus tears have traditionally been associated with a poor prognosis because they occur perpendicular to circumferential meniscal fibers, compromising hoop tension. Advances in surgical technique and biologic augmentation have facilitated repair of these complex injuries. The purpose of this study was to compare post-operative complication and surgical revision rates in patients who underwent repair of a radial meniscus tear versus bucket-handle meniscus tear. We hypothesized the outcomes of repair of radial meniscus tear would be similar to a matched group of patients who underwent repair of a bucket handle meniscus tear. Methods: A retrospective study was performed to identify patients who underwent repair of radial meniscus tear. Chart review was performed for 1506 patients who underwent meniscus repair from 2012 to 2019, and demographic information, type of meniscus tear, concomitant ACL reconstruction, post-operative complications, repeat surgeries, and failure at the repair site were detailed in a database. Patients who underwent repair of a radial tear were matched with patients who underwent repair of a bucket-handle tear based on sex, age (within 5 years), BMI (within 5 kg/m2), meniscus laterality, and concomitant ACL reconstruction. Isolated meniscus repairs were augmented with platelet rich plasma (PRP). Results: Fifty patients (age, 31.8 ± 15.2 years; BMI, 30.2 ± 6.4 kg/m2) were identified who underwent a radial meniscus tear repair. Of these patients, 16 (32.0%) were female and 23 (46.0%) underwent concomitant ACL reconstruction. Complications including recurrent swelling, stiffness, persistent pain, and repeat injury were reported in 15 patients (30.0%). Six patients underwent repeat surgery (12.0%). Four repeat surgical patients, who had previously undergone meniscus repair and concomitant ACL reconstruction, were found to have an intact radial repair at the time of second surgery, and underwent repeat surgery for a reason unrelated to the radial tear repair (e.g. cyclops lesion, synovectomy, new meniscus tear). Two patients had a radial tear repair failure that required surgical revision (4.0%). Radial tear repair patients who underwent concomitant ACL reconstruction differed significantly from those who did not only in age (ACL group, 26.0 ± 10.9 y; non-ACL group, 36.6 ± 16.7 y; p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in post-operative complications, repeat surgeries, or failures between the radial and bucket-handle tear repair patients. Conclusions: Repair of radial meniscus tears with contemporary techniques and biological enhancement with either ACL reconstruction or PRP can be expected to have similar outcomes to repairs of bucket handle meniscus tears.

Outcome of meniscal repairs in paediatric population: A tertiary centre experience.

Meniscal sparing surgery is a widely utilised treatment option for unstable meniscal tears with the aim of minimising the risk of progression towards osteoarthritis. However, there is limited data in the literature on meniscal repair outcomes in skeletally immature patients. To evaluate the re-operation rate and functional outcomes of meniscal repairs in children and adolescents. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent arthroscopic meniscal repair surgery between January 2007 and January 2018. All patients were under the age of 18 at the time of surgery. Procedures were all performed by a single surgeon. Information was gathered from our hospital Electronic Patient Records system. The primary outcome measure was re-operation rate (need for further surgery on the same meniscus). Secondary outcome measures were surgical complications and patient reported outcome measures that were International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner and Lysholm scores. We identified 59 patients who underwent 66 All-inside meniscal repairs (32 medial meniscus and 34 Lateral meniscus). Meniscal repairs were performed utilizing FasT-Fix (Smith and Nephew) implants. There were 37 males and 22 females with an average age of 14 years (range 6-16). The average follow-up time was 53 months (range 26-140). Six patients had concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery along with the meniscal repair. There were no intra-operative complications. The re-operation rate for meniscal repairs was 16.6% (11 cases) with 2 patients requiring further meniscal repairs and 9 patients underwent partial meniscectomies. The mean postoperative IKDC score was 88 (44-100), Tegner score was 7(2-10) and Lysholm score was 94 (57-100). Our results showed that arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears in the paediatric population is an effective treatment option that has a low failure rate and good postoperative clinical with the advantage of preserving meniscal tissues.

Intermediate-Term Clinical Outcomes of High-Density Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation in Patients with Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Focal Chondral Lesions.

To investigate intermediate-term clinical results in patients with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and chondral defect treated with high-density autologous chondrocyte implantation (HD-ACI) compared to patients without ACL tear but with a chondral lesion and HD-ACI treatment. Forty-eight patients with focal chondral lesions underwent HD-ACI (24 with ACL reconstruction after an ACL injury and 24 with an intact ACL). Follow-up assessments occurred at 6, 12, and 24 months. Patient-reported knee function and symptoms were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire, pain was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and adverse events were monitored. Physical activity was assessed using the Tegner Activity Level Scale, and cartilage healing was evaluated with the Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) score. No significant adverse events occurred during follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvements at 2 years compared to baseline (VAS: 8.0 ± 1.3 to 1.4 ± 2.0 [normal ACL]; 7.4 ± 2.3 to 2.1 ± 2.3 [ACL reconstruction]; IKDC: 39.2 ± 10.6 to 76.1 ± 22.0 [intact ACL]; 35.6 ± 12.1 to 74.6 ± 20.9 [ACL reconstruction]). Patients in both groups exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for IKDC scores. The Tegner Activity Level Scale decreased immediately after surgery and increased after 2 years, with 70.6% (normal ACL) and 89.5% (ACL reconstruction) returning to their preinjury activity levels. No significant differences in the MOCART score were observed between the groups. ACL reconstruction does not appear to reduce the outcomes (at 2 years) of HD-ACI.

Effect of Posterior Tibial Slope on Outcomes After Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) leads to a relative anterior translation of the tibia on the femur. This is thought to decrease the stress on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction (PCLR) grafts. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of PTS on knee laxity, graft failure, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores after PCLR without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). It was hypothesized that patients with higher PTS would have less knee laxity, fewer graft failures, and better PROs compared with patients with lower PTS. Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. All patients who underwent PCLR between 2001 and 2020 at a single institution were identified. Patients were excluded if they underwent concomitant or prior ACLR or proximal tibial osteotomy, were younger than 18 years, had <2 years of in-person clinical follow-up, and did not have documented PRO scores (Lysholm score and International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score). Data were collected retrospectively from a prospectively gathered database. PTS measurements were recorded from perioperative lateral knee radiographs. A linear regression model was created to analyze PTS in relation to PRO scores. Patients with a grade 1 (1-5 mm) or higher posterior drawer were compared with those who had a negative posterior drawer. A total of 37 knees met inclusion criterion; the mean age was 30.7 years at the time of surgery. The mean clinical follow-up was 5.8 years. No significant correlation was found between either the Lysholm score or the IKDC score and the PTS. Twelve knees (32.4%) had a positive posterior drawer at final follow-up. The mean PTS in knees with a positive posterior drawer was 6.2°, whereas that for knees with a negative posterior drawer was 8.3° (P = .08). No significant differences in PRO scores were identified for knees with versus knees without a positive posterior drawer. No documented graft failures or revisions were found. No significant differences were found in PROs or graft failure rates based on PTS at a mean of 5.8 years after PCLR. Increased tibial slope trended toward being protective against a positive posterior drawer, although this did not reach statistical significance.

MRI Criteria for Healing at 1 Year After Repair of a Traumatic Meniscal Tear

Background: Meniscal repair for a traumatic meniscal tear is increasingly used to preserve the meniscus. Interpreting postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans remains challenging, especially in symptomatic patients. There is a lack of reliable MRI criteria to affirm the healed character of a traumatic meniscal injury repair. Purpose: To identify relevant MRI criteria for meniscal healing after meniscal repair. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We prospectively included all patients with a traumatic meniscal injury who underwent either an isolated meniscal repair or a repair during a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A standardized preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluation was performed, along with collection of functional scores—Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm Score, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. An MRI scan was performed 1 year postoperatively and compared with the preoperative MRI scan. The following MRI aspects were analyzed: variation of morphology and fat-saturated (FS) T2 intensity signal and pre- and postoperative tear diastasis measurement. Results: Fifty patients (age, mean ± SD, 28.7 ± 8.5 years [range, 16-45 years]) who were 1 year postoperative were included. All patients were considered clinically healed had the same MRI characteristics. A signal change (FS T2) was observed from a high signal intensity fluid to a nonfluid moderate signal intensity. The morphology of the lesion was more complex: from the initial lesion, line ramifications appeared, creating the appearance of tree branches. The tear diastasis decreased (from 2.3 ± 0.5 mm [range, 1.3-3.5] to 1.1 ± 0.28 mm [range, 0.5-1.5]). Conclusion: MRI criteria confirming meniscal healing after traumatic meniscal repair at 1 year were identified: a change in the intrameniscal signal becoming nonfluid and moderate in intensity; a reduction in tear diastasis to <1.5 mm; and a change in the signal morphology of the repaired meniscus.

Impact of Biologic Augmentation on Revision Surgery Rates After Meniscus Repair: A Matched-Cohort Analysis of 3420 Patients.

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) have gained popularity in recent years as biologic approaches to potentially augment healing after meniscus repair. There have been few studies comparing outcomes in patients undergoing meniscus repair with versus without biologic augmentation and, furthermore, little clarity on the role of biologic augmentation for meniscus repairs performed with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). To determine the association of BMAC or PRP augmentation with revision surgery after both isolated meniscus repair and meniscus repair performed concomitantly with ACLR. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. The PearlDiver Mariner dataset was queried to identify all patients who underwent primary meniscus repair, both with and without concomitant ACLR, and who received ipsilateral BMAC or PRP at the time of surgery. Patients who underwent similar surgery but without BMAC or PRP augmentation were then identified and matched in a 5:1 ratio according to age, sex, body mass index, and various comorbidities to 3 separate BMAC/PRP augmentation groups: overall cohort (with and without ACLR), repair with concomitant ACLR, and isolated repair. The primary outcome was revision meniscus surgery (meniscectomy or revision meniscus repair). Overall, 3420 patients (570 with BMAC/PRP augmentation; 2850 matched controls without augmentation) were included. There were no significant differences in the reported demographics or comorbidities between any of the BMAC/PRP groups and their respective matched controls (P > .05 for all comparisons). There was no difference in revision rate between BMAC/PRP-augmented isolated meniscus repairs and matched controls (P = .235). Patients who underwent BMAC/PRP-augmented meniscus repair with concomitant ACLR experienced a significantly lower incidence of revision surgery compared with matched controls without BMAC/PRP augmentation (5.2% vs 7.9% respectively; odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.63; P < .001), but the number of revisions was relatively small. There was no association between BMAC or PRP augmentation and the incidence of revision surgery after isolated primary meniscus repair. There was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of revision meniscus surgery when BMAC or PRP was used to augment meniscus repairs in the setting of concurrent ACLR; however, the overall revision rates were small.

More Is Not Merrier: Increasing Numbers of All-Inside Implants Do Not Correlate with Higher Odds of Revision Surgery.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the number of all-inside meniscal repair implants placed and the risk of repair failure. We hypothesized that the use of higher numbers of all-inside meniscus repair implants would be associated with increased failure risk. A retrospective chart review identified 351 patients who underwent all-inside meniscus repair between 2006 and 2013 by a sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon at a single institution. Patient demographics (age, body mass index [BMI], sex) and surgical data (number of implants used, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [cACLR], and tear type/size/location) were recorded. Patients who received repairs in both menisci or who had follow-up < 1-year postoperatively were excluded. Repair failure was identified through chart review or patient interviews defined as a revision surgery on the index knee such as partial meniscectomy, total knee arthroplasty, meniscus transplant, or repeat repair. Logistic regression modeling was utilized to evaluate the relationship between the number of implants used and repair failure. A total of 227 all-inside meniscus repairs were included with a mean follow-up of 5.0 ± 3.0 years following surgery. Repair failure was noted in 68 knees (30.3%)-in 28.1% of knees with fewer than four implants and in 35.8% of knees with four or more implants (p = 0.31). No significant increase in failure was observed with increasing number of all-inside medial (odds ratio [OR]: 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-1.7; p = 0.46) or lateral (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.47-1.57; p = 0.63) implants after controlling for patient age, BMI, cACLR, tear type, or size. Tears of the lateral meniscus located in the red-white and white-white zones had lower odds of failure (OR: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.02-0.88; p = 0.036) than tears within the red-red zone, and patients with cACLR had lower odds of repair failure (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.18-0.86, p = 0.024) than those without. The number of all-inside implants placed during meniscus tear repair did not affect the likelihood of repair failure leading to reoperation after controlling for BMI, age, tear type, size, location, and cACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Poster 341: Clinical Outcomes of Concomitant Arthroscopically Assisted Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Meniscal Allograft Transplantation

Objectives: Single-stage meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a technically challenging procedure for management of knee pain and instability in younger patients. However, there is limited data on specific outcomes of this procedure, such as return to work and functional status relative to the U.S. population at large. The purpose of this study was to assess surgical and patient-reported outcomes following concomitant ACLR and MAT. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent concomitant ACLR and MAT at our institution from 2010 to 2021. We included patients who underwent either concomitant primary or revision ACLR and medial or lateral MAT with a minimum follow-up of 8 months. Complications, graft failures, and reoperations were abstracted from patient records and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain, satisfaction, Lysholm Knee Scale, return to sport, and return to work outcomes were assessed using an email survey. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference, Pain Intensity, and Physical Function Scores were used to measure patients’ functional status relative to the U.S. population. All p-values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Results: The cohort consisted of 18 knees of 17 individual patients (16 unilateral, 1 bilateral). The cohort were majority male (15 patients; 83%) with mean age of 31.6 years (range 19-49) and mean BMI of 27.6 (range 22.2-53.3). Mean follow-up time was 47.3 months (range 8-101). A majority underwent revision ACLR (12 patients; 67%) with medial MAT (18 patients; 92%). Reoperation rate was high (5 patients; 28%) but only one patient experienced recurrence of painrequiring TKA. Patient-reported outcomes (n = 14) were generally positive with low VAS pain (mean 2.2), high satisfaction (mean 77.9%), and fair Lysholm score (mean 81.1) though satisfaction was lower among revision ACLR patients versus primary ACLR patients (mean 67% vs 100%; p = 0.04). Return to work rate was high (13 patients; 93%) while return to sport rate was low (6 patients; 43%). Postoperative PROMIS scores were comparable or superior to the national average and correlated significantly with patient satisfaction (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: The concomitant ACLR and MAT procedure is associated with excellent knee pain and functional outcomes, low rates of complications and meniscus graft failure, and high rate of return to work after surgery. However, rate of return to sport is low and satisfaction is worse among revision ACLR patients. Overall, the single-stage ACLR and MAT procedure appears to be a safe and efficacious treatment option for patients with concomitant ACL and meniscus deficiency.

Poster 270: Joint Preservation and Complications of Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy at a Minimum of 5- Year Follow-up

Objectives: To report the incidence of complications after TTO at a minimum of 5-year follow-up. As a secondary outcome, we aimed to identify predictors of postoperative complications. As a tertiary outcome, we aimed to report the rate of progression of knee osteoarthritis. We hypothesized that recurrent instability following TTO is rare and the rate of progression of knee osteoarthritis is slow Methods: Patients undergoing primary TTO between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2015, and having a minimum of 5-year clinical follow-up data were included. Exclusion criteria were patients with shorter than 5-year follow-up, revision TTO, TTO following total knee arthroplasty, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, history of or concomitant distal femoral osteotomy, history of soft tissue procedures or trochleaplasty for patellar instability, congenital patella dislocation or patellar instability secondary to a congenital disorder/syndrome. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were collected on a RedCAP database. Risk factors for complications were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 72 (50 female/22 male) patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 22.0 years. The mean follow-up period was 104.8 months (67-138). Sixty-four patients underwent anteromedialization TTO and 8 underwent medialization TTO. The median BMI was 26.4 kg/m2. Sixty-six patients had isolated TTO, and 11 patients had TTO and concomitant medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. One screw was used in 5 patients and 2 screws in 67 patients. Tibial tubercle was distalized in 25 patients and not distalized in 47 patients. Fifty-six patients reported they never smoked before their surgery and 15 patients reported they smoked at some point in their lives before the surgery. The overall complication rate was 30.5% (22/72). The incidence of major complications was 6.9%. Univariate logistic regression analysis on complications revealed patients who ever smoked are more likely to experience a postoperative complication (OR=4.33 (1.29, 14.53), p-value = 0.018). Multivariable model for complication, using TTO Procedure as the main predictor revealed TTO procedure (TTO vs TTO+STP), number of screws, and distalization didn’t affect complication rates. Multivariable model for complication, using TTO Technique (AMZ vs MZ) as the main predictor, revealed no difference in TTO technique. The mean radiographic follow-up was 67 moths. The preoperative rate of patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade III-IV increased from 11.7% to 18.8% at the last follow-up. The rate of patients with an osteophyte on knee radiographs was 33.3% before surgery and increased to 39.1% at the last follow up. Of 72 patients, 12 were athlete. Rate of return to sports was 91.6% (11/12) after TTO procedure. Mean time to return to sports was 27.6±10.2 weeks. Conclusions: Tibial tubercle osteotomy is a viable option for the treatment of patellar instability with low recurrence and major complication rates at mid and long-term follow-up. It successfully prevents and slows the progression of knee osteoarthritis by changing the contact biomechanics. Patients who smoke should be counseled about the increased risks of complications before the surgery. [Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text]

Poster 266: Outcomes of Surgical Stabilization for Recurrent Patellar Instability in Competitive Wrestlers: Outcomes, Reoperations, and Return to Play at 6 years Mean Follow Up

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess return to play (RTP), patient-reported outcomes (PRO), and reoperation rates following patellofemoral stabilization surgeries (PSS) for recurrent patellar instability (RPI) in a cohort of competitive wrestlers. Methods: All competitive wrestlers with a history of an RPI and subsequent PSS at a single institution between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Primary PSS ranged from MPFL reconstruction (n = 31; 50%) or MPFL repair (n = 22; 33.5%), and other PSS (n = 9; 14.5%) in the form of tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO), lateral retinaculum release (LRR), and medial retinaculum reefing (MRR). Exclusion criteria included revision PSS, or concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or multi ligament knee injury. All patients were contacted for determination of reinjury rates, current sport status, and PROs. Surgical failure defined as subsequent patellar dislocation despite operative management or need for secondary PSS. Results: Ultimately, 62 knees in 56 wrestlers were included at a mean follow-up time of 6.6 years (range, 2.0 – 18.8 years). RTP occurred in 55.3% of wrestlers at a mean of 8.8 ± 6.7 months. Among the PSS no differences were observed between rates of RTP (P = .676), postoperative pain (P = .176), Tegner activity level (P = .801), International Knee Documentation Committee (P = .378), Lysholm (P = .402), or Kujala scores (P = .370). Recurrent patellar instability was the most common complication in 21% of knees. Among PSS types, MPFL reconstruction had the lowest rate of RPI (6.5% vs. 27.3% vs. 55.6%; P = .005), and surgical failure (9.7% vs. 31.8% vs. 55.6%; P = .008). Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from surgical failure of the entire cohort was 91.9% at 1 year, 77.7% at 5 years, and 65.7% at 15 years. MPFL reconstruction had the highest survivorship when compared to MPFL repair and other PSS up to 10 years after the index surgery (90.3% vs. 64.1% vs. 27.8%; P = .048). Conclusions: Recurrent patellar instability remains a concern for competitive wrestlers after PSS. MPFL reconstruction may serve as a more durable surgical treatment option with lower rates of RPI and failure when compared to other PSS up to 10 years after surgery. [Table: see text]

Poster 333: Outcomes of Anterior Closing Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients Undergoing ACL Revision Reconstruction

Objectives: Graft failure rates following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been reported up to 30%. According to the literature, one anatomic variant linked to graft reinjury is a high posterior tibial slope. As a result, surgeons are exploring the effectiveness of slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) to reduce the subsequent reinjury risk. While cadaveric models indicate that this procedure decreases the forces across the ACL graft, there is limited evidence demonstrating its efficacy in clinical trials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare self-reported patient outcomes between patients undergoing ACL revision surgery with a slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (ACL+HTO) and matched controls undergoing revision ACL reconstruction without slope reducing HTO. We hypothesized that patients undergoing ACL+HTO would exhibit similar outcomes with a low failure rate when compared to their matched counterparts. Methods: A retrospective matched-case control study was conducted for patients undergoing ACL revision reconstruction from 2018 to 2021, utilizing a single surgeon database (n = 1,781). Patients in the HTO group were included if they were at least one year out from surgical ACL reconstruction and slope reducing osteotomy. Patients were excluded if they had a primary ACL reconstruction or no concomitant ACL reconstruction with an HTO. Patients in the ACL+HTO group were age, gender, and setting-matched to a control group of patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction. Descriptive patient demographic and surgical data were obtained, including pre/postoperative posterior tibial slope (o) for the HTO group. Complications and injury surveillance was conducted throughout the postoperative follow-up period. Primary outcome measures included the Single Assessment Numeric Scale (SANE), and graft failure rates at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included return to sport rate and level, and postoperative complications (infection, loss of motion, deep vein thrombosis, etc). Generalized linear models were conducted using parametric and nonparametric equivalents to compare baseline and outcome measures between groups with an a-priori alpha level of .05. Results: From a group of 364 revision ACL reconstructions, 9 patients met the inclusion criteria for the ACL+HTO group (Table 1). This group was age, gender and revision matched to 30 patients in the control group. Baseline comparisons revealed that the ACL control group weighed more than the experimental group (198.2 ±26.4 vs 183.7 ±21.7, P &lt;.001), however all other comparisons were not statistically different. The mean pre op posterior tibial slope was 19.2o ±4.1o and 7.7o ±2.3o following HTO (mean diff: -11.5o, P &lt;.001). Mean time to follow-up was 1.82 ±0.3 years. At follow-up, there were no statistical differences in self-reported knee function (SANE score), graft reinjury rate, rate of return to sport, or level of return to sport between groups (Table 2). There were no graft reinjuries reported in the ACL+HTO group, and approximately 85.8% returned to some level of sporting activity with 42% returning to a level I or II cutting and pivoting sport. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence provided in the current study suggests that slope reducing HTO in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction for large posterior tibial slope deformities is effective at correcting malalignment and avoiding graft failure out to 2 years. This procedure also holds promise to allow a majority of patients to return to various levels of sporting activities. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study comparing the intermediate outcomes of this subpopulation to a matched revision ACL cohort. While these data do provide evidence for ongoing investigation, it is important to note that this pilot study is underpowered and we strongly recommend the performance of larger clinical trials to confirm these results. [Table: see text][Table: see text]

Poster 350: Outcomes of Anterior Closing Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients Undergoing Revision ACL Reconstruction

Objectives: Graft failure rates following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been reported up to 30%. According to the literature, one anatomic variant linked to graft reinjury is a high posterior tibial slope. As a result, surgeons are exploring the effectiveness of slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) to reduce the subsequent reinjury risk. While cadaveric models indicate that this procedure decreases the forces across the ACL graft, there is limited evidence demonstrating its efficacy in clinical trials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare self-reported patient outcomes between patients undergoing ACL revision surgery with a slope reducing high tibial osteotomy and matched controls undergoing revision ACL reconstruction without slope reducing HTO. We hypothesized that patients undergoing ACL+HTO would exhibit similar outcomes with a low failure rate when compared to their matched counterparts. Methods: A retrospective matched-case control study was conducted for patients undergoing ACL revision reconstruction from 2018 to 2021, utilizing a single surgeon database (n = 1,781). Patients in the HTO group were included if they were at least one year out from surgical ACL reconstruction and slope reducing osteotomy. Patients were excluded if they were undergoing primary ACL reconstruction or no concomitant ACL reconstruction. Patients in the ACL+HTO group were age, gender, and setting-matched to a control group of patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction. Descriptive patient demographic and surgical data were obtained, including pre/postoperative posterior tibial slope(o) for the HTO group. Complications and injury surveillance was conducted throughout the postoperative follow-up period. Primary outcome measures included the Single Assessment Numeric Scale (SANE), and graft failure rates at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included return to sport rate/level and postoperative complications (infection, loss of motion, deep vein thrombosis, etc). Generalized linear models were conducted using parametric and nonparametric equivalents to compare baseline and outcome measures between groups with an a-priori alpha level of .05. Results: From a group of 364 revision ACL reconstructions, 9 patients met the inclusion criteria for the ACL+HTO group (Table 1). This group was age, gender and revision matched to 30 patients in the control group. Baseline comparisons revealed that the ACL control group weighed more than the experimental group (198.2 ±26.4 vs 183.7 ±21.7, P &lt;.001), however all other comparisons were not statistically different. The mean pre operative posterior tibial slope was 19.2o ±4.1o and 7.7o ±2.3o following HTO (mean diff: -11.5o, P &lt;.001). Mean time to follow-up was 1.82 ±0.3 years. At follow-up, there were no statistical differences in self-reported knee function (SANE score), graft reinjury rate, rate of return-to- sport, or level of return to sport between groups (Table 3). There were no graft reinjuries reported in the ACL+HTO group and approximately 85.8% returned to some level of sporting activity with 42% returning to a level I or II cutting and pivoting sport. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence provided in the current study suggests that slope reducing HTO in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction for large posterior tibial slope deformities is effective at correcting malalignment and avoiding graft failure out to 2 years. This procedure also holds promise to allow a majority of patients to return to various levels of sporting activities. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study comparing the intermediate outcomes of this subpopulation to a matched revision ACL cohort. While these data do provide evidence for ongoing investigation, it is important to note that this pilot study is underpowered and we strongly recommend the performance of larger clinical trials to confirm these results. [Table: see text][Table: see text]

Surgical Stabilization for Recurrent Patellar Instability in Competitive Wrestlers: Outcomes, Reoperations, and Return to Play at 6-Year Mean Follow-up

Background: The extent to which recurrent patellar instability (RPI) affects wrestlers has not been thoroughly examined. Purpose: To assess return to wrestling (RTW), patient-reported outcomes, and reoperation rates after patellofemoral stabilization surgery (PFSS) for RPI in a cohort of competitive wrestlers. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All competitive wrestlers with a history of RPI and subsequent PFSS performed at a single institution between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Primary PFSS procedures included medial patellofemoral (MPFL) reconstruction (n = 31; 50%); MPFL repair (n = 22; 35.5%); or other PFSS (n = 9; 14.5%), such as tibial tubercle osteotomy, lateral retinacular release, and/or medial retinacular reefing. Exclusion criteria included revision PFSS or concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or multiligament knee injury. Surgical failure was defined as subsequent patellar dislocation despite operative management or need for secondary PFSS. Results: Ultimately, 62 knees in 56 wrestlers with a mean age of 17.0 years (range, 14.0-22.8 years) were included at a mean follow-up of 6.6 years (range, 2.0-18.8 years). RTW occurred in 55.3% of wrestlers at a mean ± SD 8.8 ± 6.7 months. Among PFSS types, no differences were observed in rates of RTW (P = .676), postoperative pain (P = .176), Tegner activity level (P = .801), International Knee Documentation Committee (P = .378), Lysholm (P = .402), or Kujala scores (P = .370). RPI was the most common postoperative complication (n = 13; 21.0%). MPFL reconstruction had the lowest rate of RPI (6.5% vs 27.3% [repair] vs 55.6% [other]; P = .005) and surgical failure (9.7% vs 31.8% [repair] vs 55.6% [other]; P = .008). Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from surgical failure of the entire cohort was 91.9% at 1 year, 77.7% at 5 years, and 65.7% at 15 years. MPFL reconstruction had the highest survivorship when compared with MPFL repair and other PFSS up to 10 years after the index surgery (90.3% vs 64.1% vs 27.8%; P = .048). Conclusion: RPI remains a concern for competitive wrestlers after PFSS. MPFL reconstruction may serve as a more durable surgical treatment option with lower rates of RPI and failure when compared with other PFSS procedures at up to 10 years after surgery.

Save the Meniscus: The Meniscal Mantra Remains Durable: Commentary on an article by Rick W. Wright, MD, et al.: "Ten-Year Outcomes of Second-Generation, All-Inside Meniscal Repair in the Setting of ACL Reconstruction".

Commentary Save the meniscus. Save the meniscus. Save the meniscus. This is a subconscious orthopaedic mantra that we have all heard and repeated numerous times. Ever since Fairbank’s landmark study in 1948, “Knee Joint Changes After Meniscectomy,” and numerous later studies, we have learned to respect the importance of preserving the meniscus and, in turn, preventing degenerative changes1. In 2023, we may continue to debate over the best repair technique and the best repair augmentation and/or biologics, but we can all agree that we should do what we can to preserve and repair the meniscus. This has been demonstrated to be even more certain in the setting of a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Literature has demonstrated that meniscal tears heal better in the environment of an ACLR and, therefore, we should attempt to repair and preserve the meniscus as much as possible in this setting2,3. Historically, inside-out meniscal repair techniques were considered the gold standard, but as all-inside techniques have become more reliable, user-friendly, and able to mimic the traditional technique, they are more popularly used4. There are few 10-year outcome studies, and not many that examine all-inside meniscal suture devices; therefore, I commend Wright et al. on their current study. The authors performed a Level-IV retrospective review of 81 patients with a meniscal repair and concomitant primary ACLR using the second-generation, all-inside FAST-FIX Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew). Some of these patients were included in their previous study evaluating outcomes of all-inside, second-generation repair at a 5-year follow-up4. In this current study, 69 of the 81 patients had a 10-year follow-up and 9 (13%) of the 69 patients had a failed meniscal repair, which was defined as a repeat surgical intervention involving resection or revision repair. The authors demonstrated that 84% to 88% of patients had a successful repair and all patients, regardless of failure, had favorable patient-reported outcome measures, which included the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and the Marx Activity Rating Scale score, at 10 years. There were 59 medial repairs and 22 lateral repairs, and, of all the repaired tears, there were 13 bucket-handle tears, and the remaining tears were vertical longitudinal tears in the red-red or red-white vascular region. The study did not include radial tears, root tears, or ramp lesions. The mean number of sutures used for repair was only 2. Concerns with regard to the study include the lack of a comparison group, the use of older devices, and the shorter postoperative rehabilitation protocol. There are now third-generation, all-inside repair devices available, and the postoperative rehabilitation after a meniscal repair and ACLR is now ≥8 months. Perhaps this longer rehabilitation time can influence meniscal repair success or failure rates. The authors have demonstrated that the success rate of meniscal repair is 84% to 88% using an all-inside, second-generation technique with a concomitant ACLR. Although this is considered successful, what else can we do to optimize our success rates even more? Should we use better techniques and devices, or orthobiologics? How will this change as we repair different types of tears, including root and ramp tears? Also, how will longer rehabilitation affect meniscal healing and retear rates? If our mantra, save the meniscus, remains true, then I look forward to future data demonstrating what else we can do to improve success rates with all tears (bucket-handle, longitudinal, root, and ramp) with newer techniques and biologics.

Ten-Year Outcomes of Second-Generation, All-Inside Meniscal Repair in the Setting of ACL Reconstruction.

Meniscal repair is the goal, whenever possible, for the treatment of meniscal injury. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical success of meniscal repair performed with a second-generation, all-inside repair device with a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected patients who underwent meniscal repair by a single surgeon using the all-inside FAST-FIX Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew) in conjunction with a concurrent ACL reconstruction. Eighty-one meniscal repairs (81 patients) were identified: 59 medial repairs and 22 lateral repairs. Clinical failure was defined as repeat surgical intervention involving resection or revision repair. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and Marx Activity Rating Scale score. Ten-year follow-up was obtained for 85% (69) of 81 patients. Nine patients (13% of 69) underwent a failed meniscal repair (6 medial, 3 lateral), corresponding to a failure rate of 12% (6 of 50) for medial repairs and 16% (3 of 19) for lateral repairs. The mean time to failure was 2.8 years (range, 1.2 to 5.6 years) for the medial repairs and 5.8 years (range, 4.2 to 7.0 years) for the lateral repairs (p = 0.002). There was no difference in mean patient age, sex, body mass index, graft type, or number of sutures utilized between successful repairs and failures. Postoperative KOOS and IKDC outcome scores significantly improved over baseline scores (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes at 10 years between the group with successful repairs and those who had a failed repair. This report of long-term follow-up results of primary second-generation, all-inside meniscal repair demonstrates its relative success when it is performed with concurrent ACL reconstruction. After a minimum follow-up of 10 years, 84% to 88% of the patients continued to demonstrate successful repair. Failure of medial meniscal repairs occurred significantly earlier compared with lateral meniscal repairs. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Meniscal Repair Outcome in 3829 Patients With a Minimum Follow-up From 2 Years Up to 5 Years: A Meta-analysis on the Overall Failure Rate and Factors Influencing Failure

Background: The importance of meniscal repair is widely accepted because of the association of loss of meniscal tissue with the development of early-onset knee arthritis. Many factors influencing the results of meniscal repair have been reported, but results remain controversial. Purpose: This meta-analysis determines the pooled meniscal repair failure rate of studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years up to 5 years, with a mean follow-up of 43 months. Moreover, selected failure-influencing factors are analyzed. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 2000 and November 2021 reporting on meniscal repair outcome with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The overall pooled failure rate and pooled failure rates for possible predictors were calculated. Random-effect models were used to pool failure rates, and effect estimates in the form of odds ratios with 95% CIs were established. Results: The initial literature search identified 6519 studies. A total of 51 studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 3931 menisci were included with an overall failure rate of 14.8%. Subgroup analysis revealed a significantly lower failure rate for meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction compared with knees without any reported injury to the ACL (8.5% vs 14%; P = .043). The pooled failure rate for lateral meniscal repair was significantly lower than that for medial meniscal repair (6.1% vs 10.8%; P = .031). Pooled failure rates of all-inside and inside-out repair were not significantly different (11.9% vs 10.6%; P > .05). Conclusion: This meta-analysis on close to 4000 patients demonstrates an overall meniscal repair failure rate of 14.8% at a minimum follow-up from 2 years up to 5 years. Meniscal repair remains a procedure with a high failure rate, especially within the first 2 postoperative years. This review and meta-analysis also identified clinically relevant factors associated with favorable outcomes such as concomitant ACL reconstruction or repair of the lateral meniscus. All-inside meniscal repair with the latest-generation devices yields failure rates of <10%. The failure mechanism and the time of failure is poorly documented; further studies are needed for a better understanding of the retear mechanism.