Meniscal Repair Group Research Articles

Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without concomitant meniscal repair: A prospective comparative study

Background: The treatment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury includes ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) or ligament preservation, where the former is considered the gold standard. But in meniscal injury, though commonly followed is menisectomy, meniscal repair has gained popularity and success which necessitates the analysis of outcome between ACL-R + meniscal repair and ACL-R + menisectomy as clear consensus have not been established so far in deciding the better overall procedure with respect to function. Methods: This is a prospective, comparative study done in 122 patients with ACL injury and medial/ lateral meniscus in south Indian population at a single center. Where meniscal repair (61) and menisectomy (partial/complete, n=61) with ACL-R were carried out and were evaluated pre-operatively, during the postoperative period at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months of follow-up for function and compared. The primary outcome evaluated was pain and other symptoms like limping, giving way, swelling and locking were also noted and analysed using KOOS, IKDC and Lysholm scores. Results: The mean difference in KOOS score in postoperative period, at 3 and 6months were significantly higher among the ACL-R + meniscal repair group than the ACL-R + meniscectomy group which is statistically significant. Moreover the median percentage change in IKDC and Lysholm scores from baseline to postoperative 3 and 6 months were significantly higher in ACL-R + meniscal repair group than the other. Conclusion: The meniscal repair with ACL-R has a lower failure rate and shows better functional outcomes than the other group which underwent ACL-R and meniscectomy. Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; ACL-R; meniscectomy; meniscal repair; meniscal tear

Arthroscopic Meniscectomy vs Meniscal Repair: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes.

Background Meniscal tears are the most common injury of the knee. Surgical treatment has fallen into contention recently and includes arthroscopic meniscectomy and meniscal repair. The primary aim of this study was to quantitatively evaluate patients with isolated meniscal tears and compare their outcomes with patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscus surgery. The secondary aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscectomy with patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscal repair. Methods This comparative clinical study screened 334 patients to identify subjects who underwent arthroscopic knee surgery for isolated meniscal tears and compare them to patients with symptomatic isolated meniscal tears awaiting surgery using validated patient-reported outcome measures. These included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form, Lysholm score, Tegner score, EuroQol-5 Dimension, and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. Results A total of 117 patients (Meniscal Tear group (n=36), Meniscectomy group (n=64), and Meniscal Repair group (n=17)) were included in the final data analysis. Both the Meniscectomy group and the Meniscal Repair group (mean 55-month follow-up) showed significantly better clinical outcomes than patients in the Meniscal Tear group (p<0.05). Overall, the Meniscal Repair group demonstrated superior clinical outcomes when compared to the Meniscectomy group (p<0.05). Conclusion Arthroscopic knee surgery showed significant clinical benefit at medium-term follow-up in treating patients with isolated meniscal tears. When feasible, meniscal repair should be performed preferentially over meniscectomy.

Inferior Healing Rate in Isolated Meniscal Repair than that in Meniscal Repair with Concomitant ACL Reconstruction Evaluated with MRI.

Isolated meniscal repair has been suggested as one of the contributing factors in unhealed meniscal repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the healing rate between isolated meniscal repair and meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using a standardised assessment method after propensity score matching. Accuracy of the Crues' grading system for meniscal healing was validated using second-look arthroscopy as the reference standard in 17 patients. Propensity score matching (one-to-one) was performed between 26 patients who underwent isolated meniscal repair and 98 patients who underwent meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR. Patients were matched for sex, age, side and zone of the meniscal repair, and number of sutures. Healing rates at one year which were evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were compared between the two groups. The sensitivity and specificity of the Crues' grading system on multiple plane MRI for meniscal healing were 100% and 83.3%, respectively. Both the isolated meniscal repair group and the meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR group included 21 patients after propensity score matching. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The healing rate was significantly lower in the isolated meniscal repairs group (14.3%) than in the meniscal repair concomitant with ACLR group (47.6%, P=0.04). The healing rate for isolated meniscal repair using a standardised MRI assessment method was inferior to that of meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR after propensity score matching.

Benefits of Implementing an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Ambulatory Surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in orthopaedic surgery have garnered significant focus due to their ability to control pain adequately in the immediate postoperative window, allowing for earlier mobilization, shorter hospital stays, and fewer complications. Virginia Commonwealth University created a multimodal pain management approach in which patients receive a preoperative femoral nerve block followed by periarticular intraoperative local injection anesthesia consisting of bupivacaine, ketamine, and ketorolac. We hypothesized that implementation of the ERAS protocol will decrease postoperative pain scores, decrease recovery time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and decrease opioid use in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Two patient cohorts were involved: before ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS) and after (post-ERAS). Patients with ACL reconstruction only and patients with ACL reconstruction with meniscal repair were analyzed separately. Post-ERAS patients received an intraoperative periarticular injection of bupivacaine, ketamine, and ketorolac and a postoperative multimodal pain regimen. Outcomes included time spent in the PACU, short-term and long-term opioid consumption, and pain score at discharge from the PACU. Compared with pre-ERAS patients, post-ERAS patients had decreased pain (2.1 vs 0.84 out of 10, respectively), spent less time in the PACU (79.4 vs 62.8 minutes, respectively), and had less opioid consumption in the immediate postoperative period (4.55 vs 2.26 total morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs], respectively) (P < .001 for all). After ERAS implementation, long-term MME use decreased from 410 to 321 between 0 and 2 weeks postoperatively, 92.6 to 1.69 between 2 and 6 weeks, and 494.5 to 323 between 0 and 6 weeks (P < .001 for all). All domains showed significant improvements for both the ACL and the ACL plus meniscal repair cohorts, with the exception of pain at discharge in the ACL plus meniscal repair group. The study findings suggest that an enhanced recovery pathways protocol that includes a standardized intraoperative periarticular bupivacaine, ketamine, and ketorolac injection improves pain scores in the immediate postoperative window, decreases opioid consumption, and reduces recovery time in the PACU for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.

Benefits of Meniscal Repair in Selected Patients Aged 60 Years and Older.

Background:Little is known about the benefits and outcomes of meniscal repair in patients older than 60 years.Purpose:To (1) report the clinical and radiographic outcomes of meniscal repair in patients aged ≥60 years and compare them with matched patients who underwent meniscectomy and (2) identify procedural failures.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:We included 32 knees in 32 patients aged ≥60 years (20 female, 12 male; mean age, 64.5 ± 4.6 years) who underwent meniscal repair surgery at a single medical institution between 2010 and 2020. Patients were matched according to age, sex, body mass index, and meniscal tear type with a comparison cohort who underwent meniscectomy (n = 49 patients [49 knees]; 32 female, 17 male). For all patients, demographic information, clinical history, physical examination findings, treatment details, and radiographic images were reviewed and analyzed. At final follow-up (mean, 42.2 months; range, 13-128 months), patients completed the 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Lysholm score. Clinical failure was defined as revision surgery and/or progression to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A matched-pairs t test was used to analyze differences between the 2 treatment groups, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the rates of knee osteoarthritis and progression to TKA.Results:The majority of patients had a medial meniscal tear (72.8%), whereas the lateral meniscus was torn in 27.2% of cases. Most tears were located in the meniscal root (56.8%), followed by the posterior horn (34.6%) and midbody (8.6%). At final follow-up, all outcome scores were higher in the repair group compared with the meniscectomy group (IKDC, 78.9 ± 13.4 vs 56.0 ± 15.4; KOOS, 86.6 ± 11.9 vs 61.7 ± 16.2; Lysholm, 88.3 ± 13.3 vs 68.7 ± 15.2, respectively; P < .001 for all). Clinical failure was observed in 22% of patients in the repair group.Conclusion:All clinical outcome scores were higher in the meniscal repair group compared with the matched meniscectomy group at final follow-up. The clinical failure rate of the repair group was 22%. These findings support meniscal repair in selected patients aged ≥60 years.

Effect of Concomitant Meniscal Tear on Strength and Functional Performance in Young Athletes 6 Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autograft.

Background:The effect of concomitant meniscal tears, and their associated treatment, on strength and functional recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has not been adequately investigated in young populations.Hypothesis:Concomitant meniscal tears, treated with or without repair, would not adversely affect strength, balance, or functional hop test performance at 6 months postoperatively.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:The authors retrospectively analyzed return-to-sports (RTS) assessments prospectively collected 6 months after ACLR with hamstring autograft in 165 patients ≤25 years of age. Descriptive, surgical, and RTS testing data were analyzed, and subgroups were compared using analysis of covariance models designed to assess the effects of sex, meniscal tear, and meniscal repair on RTS performance.Results:Included were 115 female (70%) and 50 male (30%) patients with a mean age of 16.4 years (range, 12.3-25 years). Of these patients, 58% had concomitant meniscal tears (59% lateral, 27% medial, 14% lateral + medial), comprising 53% of the female and 70% of the male patients. The authors treated 61% of the tears with repair, with range of motion (ROM) and weightbearing limitations imposed within the first 6 weeks postoperatively, whereas 39% were treated with partial meniscectomy, rasping, or trephination (no ROM or weightbearing restrictions). The mean deficit in hamstring strength at 6 months postoperatively was significantly greater in the meniscal tear group than in those without a tear (32.3% vs 24.6%; P = .028). The meniscal repair group had greater hamstring strength deficits than the group with meniscectomy, rasping or trephination (34.3% vs 26.2%; P = .023). Performance on dynamic balance and functional hop tests was similar among all meniscus subgroups. There were no sex-based effects on any subgroup comparisons.Conclusion:At 6 months postoperatively, both young male and young female patients who underwent ACLR with hamstring autograft demonstrated significant hamstring strength deficits compared with their nonoperative leg. The presence of a meniscal tear and subsequent repair, or its related rehabilitation restrictions, appears to have adverse effects on the postoperative recovery of hamstring strength.

Effects of different surgical procedures for meniscus injury on two-year clinical and radiological outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. -TMDU MAKS study

BackgroundThe treatment of meniscus injuries combined with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction would be important to improve outcomes after ACL reconstruction. However, the effects of treatment methods for meniscus after ACL reconstruction have not been thoroughly investigated. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of treatment methods for meniscus on clinical and radiological outcomes at 2 years after ACL reconstruction. MethodsThree-hundred and eighteen patients with primary ACL reconstruction using autologous hamstring tendon registered in our multicenter study database and who were followed up for 2 years were included. They were then divided into 3 groups, the no meniscal lesion/untreated group (n = 149), the meniscal repair group (n = 139), and the meniscal resection group (n = 30). Patient-based subjective evaluations (Lysholm score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome score and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score), objective evaluations (Lachman test, pivot shift test and KT measurement), and radiological measurements (medial and lateral joint space width) were compared among the 3 groups preoperatively and at 2 years follow-up. ResultsAll subjective scores and objective evaluations significantly improved in all groups without significant differences among the groups postoperatively. Regarding radiological findings, the medial joint space width significantly decreased only in the resection group during the 2-year period, and the medial joint space width in the resection group was significantly smaller than that of the other groups at the 2-year follow-up. Moreover, the medial joint space width significantly decreased during the 2-year period when MM was resected. ConclusionsIn radiological findings, medial meniscus resection decreased medial joint space width two years after ACL reconstruction. On the other hand, treatment methods for meniscus neither significantly affected subjective nor objective findings until the 2-year follow-up. Level of evidenceⅡ, Cohort study.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Meniscal Repair Versus Partial Meniscectomy for Medial Meniscus Root Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background:Given the superiority of meniscal repair over partial meniscectomy according to biomechanical data, the clinical outcomes of meniscal repair are likely to be better than those of partial meniscectomy for a medial meniscus root tear (MMRT).Purpose/Hypothesis:This review was designed to compare the clinical and radiological results between meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy for MMRTs. It was hypothesized that meniscal repair would result in better clinical and radiological results compared with partial meniscectomy.Study Design:Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.Methods:Studies were included in the review if they (1) included patients with MMRTs who underwent primary arthroscopic meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy and (2) analyzed validated patient-reported outcomes and/or radiological evaluations. Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated to compare partial meniscectomy with meniscal repair for each outcome.Results:A total of 13 studies were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 33.5 and 47.2 months in the meniscal repair group and partial meniscectomy group, respectively. The change in the Lysholm score from preoperatively to postoperatively was statistically significantly in favor of meniscal repair (OR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.55-3.12]), while no difference was found with respect to the change in the Tegner score between the 2 surgical approaches (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.65-2.24]). The prevalence of postoperative severe knee osteoarthritis (OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.17-0.54]) as well as that of reoperations (OR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.19]) were significantly in favor of meniscal repair.ConclusionBetter outcomes were seen after meniscal repair compared with partial meniscectomy for MMRTs, with greater improvements in Lysholm scores, and lower rates of progression to knee osteoarthritis, and lower reoperation rate.

The relationship between ACL reconstruction and meniscal repair: quality of life, sports return, and meniscal failure rate\u20142- to 12-year follow-up

BackgroundFew studies have approached in a long-term follow-up of meniscal repair at an amateur level, specially studying variables as a quality of life and failure rate. The purpose of this review is to study medium to long-term clinical results in patients at amateur sports patients, that have required meniscal sutures at our center, with or without ACL reconstruction. We evaluate the objective function of the knee, as well as patients’ return to sports activities, quality of life, and the rate of failed repair and study of the possible reasons.MethodsThis was an observational retrospective study. Ninety-two patients who regularly perform amateur sports activities (Tegner 4 to 7) were assessed, with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years, divided into 2 groups: group 1, isolated meniscal suture (43 cases) and group 2, associated to ACL reconstruction (49 cases). Each patient made this test in 2019: Lysholm and Tegner (validated for Spanish) before a knee injury and after surgery, motivation to return to sports activity (Likert scale with 3 items: low, regular, or high), and quality of life through SD-12 test.ResultsHigh return to amateur sports rate (92%) was even higher in the isolated meniscal repair group in comparison to the group with associated ACL. We have not found statistically significant differences between sports return and age, gender, injured meniscus, chondral injuries, preoperative Tegner score, or motivation. No significant differences in physical or mental health fields between both groups. Meniscal repair failed in 12 patients (13%). Higher rate of failure in isolated bucket-handle tear injuries (p < 0.0062). No statistically significant association was found between the other variables studied.ConclusionsGood results with 92% of sports return, low rate of complications, and low retear rate, even lower when is associated with ACL reconstruction and in external meniscus repair, and high values at SF-12 between 2 groups.

What Are the Outcomes of Meniscus Repair vs Excision in Stable Knees in High School and College Athletes: A Prospective Cohort Study

Objectives:In high school and college athletes, the results of isolated meniscectomy compared to meniscal repair in ligamentously stable knees is unknown. Our objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes and reoperation rates at a minimum 1 year of follow-up for high school and college athletes undergoing isolated meniscal repair compared to meniscectomy. We hypothesized that both groups would see significant improvement in outcomes with meniscectomy having higher reported outcomes and a lower reoperation rate compared to meniscal repair.Methods:Patients aged 13-22 years old undergoing meniscal surgery at a single institution between 2015-2017 were prospectively enrolled and followed in our outcomes management evaluation system (OME). Pre-operatively, patients’ baseline demographics and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) specific to meniscal pathology were collected, including Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain and quality of life (QoL) subsets. Post-operatively, intra-operative findings and treatments were recorded from OME. Patients were contacted and completed a minimum 1- or 2-year patient-reported outcome measures survey. Embedded in the post-operative survey was a question designed to evaluate the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS). Patients were also specifically asked if they had undergone any subsequent surgeries to either knee since their primary procedure as a preliminary assessment of early failure.Results:A total of 145 patients were enrolled (70% male; median age, 18 years). One-year minimum PROMs were obtained on 73% (n=106) of the cohort. The results are displayed in the table and figure. KOOS QoL (see figure) and pain scores at minimum 1-year follow-up were not significantly different between meniscal repair compared to meniscectomy. Reoperation rate was 7.5% overall with no significant difference noted between the groups. No individual variables, including body mass index (BMI), smoking, level of education, mental health status, or grade 3 or 4 cartilage lesions were found not to be significant risk factors for outcome in either group. A PASS was achieved in 82% of the meniscectomy group and 71% of the meniscal repair group.Conclusion:High school and college athletes undergoing isolated meniscal surgery had equally significant improvements in minimum 1-year PROMs regardless of whether they underwent meniscectomy or meniscal repair. Preliminary reoperation rates were similar amongst the two treatment groups and the majority of both groups achieved a patient acceptable symptom state. No individual variable was identified as a modifiable risk factor to poor outcome after isolated meniscal surgery in this age group.Figure 1.

Effect of platelet-rich plasma and platelet-rich fibrin matrix on healing of vertical meniscal tears in a rabbit model.

This study aimed to investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin matrix (PRFM) on the healing of vertical medial meniscal tears in a rabbit model. The study was conducted on 72 New Zealand mature rabbits aged more than 6 months. Rabbits were randomly assigned to six groups: control (C) group, meniscal repair (MR) group, PRP group, PRFM group, MR+PRP group, and MR+PRFM group, with 12 rabbits in each group. A 5-mm full-thickness vertical tear was created in the avascular zone of the medial meniscus corpus in the right knee of all rabbits. The respective treatment for each group was given to the meniscal tear in each rabbit. Histological evaluation of healing was performed 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. Defect filling and collagen formation remained low in the C group. However, in all other groups, there was no significant difference in the 6th week. In the 12th week, similar results as those obtained in the 6th week were obtained. In the C group, there was a difference in defect filling and cell type. This difference was that the defect filling and collagen formation remained low in the 12th week. No significant difference was observed between MR, MR + PRP and MR + PRFM groups. The MR group significantly differed from the other groups in the defect-filling rate and cell type; however, the use of PRP and PRFM did not provide an obvious benefit. The contradictory results obtained in previous studies emphasize the need for further research on the use of PRP in meniscal recovery and repair. We believe that if surgery is indicated, repair is absolutely necessary to improve the healing of the tissue in meniscal tears. Studies using human meniscal tissue for meniscal injury and those that evaluate clinical applications of PRP are warranted.

Gait Mechanics After ACL Reconstruction Differ According to Medial Meniscal Treatment

Knee osteoarthritis risk is high after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and arthroscopic meniscal surgery, and higher among individuals who undergo both. Although osteoarthritis development is multifactorial, altered walking mechanics may influence osteoarthritis progression. The purpose of this study was to compare gait mechanics after ACLR among participants who had undergone no medial meniscal surgery, partial medial meniscectomy, or medial meniscal repair. This was a secondary analysis of data collected prospectively as part of a clinical trial. Sixty-one athletes (mean age of 21.4 ± 8.2 years) who had undergone primary ACLR participated in the study when they achieved impairment resolution (5.3 ± 1.7 months postoperatively), including minimal to no effusion, full knee range of motion, and ≥80% quadriceps-strength symmetry. Participants were classified by concomitant medial meniscal treatment: no involvement or nonsurgical management of a small, stable tear; partial meniscectomy; or meniscal repair. Participants underwent comprehensive walking analyses. Joint contact forces were estimated using a previously validated, electromyography-driven musculoskeletal model. Variables were analyzed using a mixed-model analysis of variance with group and limb comparisons (α = 0.05); group comparisons of interlimb differences in measurements (surgical minus contralateral limb) were performed to determine significant interactions. The participants in the partial meniscectomy group walked with a higher peak knee adduction moment (pKAM) in the surgical versus the contralateral limb as compared with those in the meniscal repair group and those with no medial meniscal surgery (group difference for partial versus repair: 0.10 N-m/kg-m, p = 0.020; and for partial versus none: 0.06 N-m/kg-m, p = 0.037). Participants in the repair group walked with a smaller percentage of medial to total tibiofemoral loading in the surgical limb compared with both of the other groups (group difference for repair versus partial: -12%, p = 0.001; and for repair versus none: -7%, p = 0.011). The participants in the repair group loaded the medial compartment of the surgical versus the contralateral limb 0.5 times body weight less than did the participants in the partial meniscectomy group. Participants in the partial meniscectomy group walked with higher pKAM and shifted loading toward the medial compartment of the surgical limb, while participants in the repair group did the opposite, walking with lower pKAM and unloading the surgical limb relative to the contralateral limb. These findings may partially explain the conflicting evidence regarding pKAM after ACLR and the elevated risk for osteoarthritis (whether from overloading or underloading) after ACLR with concomitant medial meniscectomy or repair. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Inside-out Meniscal Repairs in the Setting of Multiligament Reconstruction in the Knee: Does Meniscal Repair Affect Outcomes and Failure Rates?

Objectives:The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes and failure rates of meniscal repair in patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction compared to patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction but lacked meniscal tears. We hypothesized that the outcomes of meniscal repair associated with a concomitant multiligament reconstruction would significantly improve from preoperatively to postoperatively at a minimum of 2 years following the index surgery. Secondarily, we hypothesized that this cohort would demonstrate similar outcomes and failure rates compared to the cohort who did not have meniscal pathology at the time of multiligament reconstruction.Methods:Inclusion criteria for the study included radiographically confirmed skeletally mature patients over 16 years of age who underwent multiligamentous reconstruction of the knee without previous ipsilateral osteotomy, intraarticular infection, or fracture. Patients were included in the experimental group if they underwent inside-out meniscus suture repair with a concurrent multiligament reconstruction. Those included in the control group (multiligament reconstruction without a meniscal tear) underwent multiligament reconstruction, but did not have any type of meniscal surgery. Lysholm, WOMAC, SF-12 PCS and MCS, Tegner Activity scale and patient satisfaction were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. Failure of the meniscal repair was defined as a re-tear of the meniscus that was confirmed arthroscopically.Results:There were 43 patients (16 females, 27 males) in the meniscal repair group and 62 patients in the control group (25 females, 37 males). Follow-up was obtained in 93% of patients with an average follow-up of 3.0 years (range, 2.0 to 4.7 years). There was a significant improvement between all preoperative and postoperative outcome scores (p<.05) for both groups. The multiligament plus meniscal repair group had significantly lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores (p=0.009, p=0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences between any other outcome score at preoperative status. There was no significant difference in any postoperative outcome score at a minimum two-year follow up between the two groups.Conclusion:Good to excellent patient reported outcomes were reported for both groups with no significant differences in outcomes between cohorts. Additionally, the failure rate for an inside-out meniscal repair with a concomitant multiligament reconstruction was low, regardless of meniscus laterality and tear characteristics. The use of multiple vertical mattress sutures and the biological augmentation resulting from intra-articular cruciate ligament reconstruction tunnel reaming may be partially responsible for the stability of the meniscus repair construct and thereby contribute to the overall improved outcomes and a low failure rate of meniscal repair despite lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores in the meniscal repair group.

Outcomes of Inside-out Meniscal Repair in the Setting of Multiligament Reconstruction in the Knee

Background: Limited evidence exists for meniscal repair outcomes in a multiligament reconstruction setting. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes and failure rates of meniscal repair in patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction compared with patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction but lacked meniscal tears. The authors hypothesized that the outcomes of meniscal repair associated with concomitant multiligament reconstruction would significantly improve from preoperatively to postoperatively at a minimum of 2 years after the index surgery. Secondarily, they hypothesized that this cohort would demonstrate similar outcomes and failure rates compared with the cohort that did not have meniscal lesions at the time of multiligament reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Inclusion criteria for the study included radiographically confirmed skeletally mature patients of at least 16 years of age who underwent multiligamentous reconstruction of the knee without previous ipsilateral osteotomy, intra-articular infections, or intra-articular fractures. Patients were included in the experimental group if they underwent inside-out meniscal suture repair with concurrent multiligament reconstruction. Those included in the control group (multiligament reconstruction without a meniscal tear) underwent multiligament reconstruction but did not undergo any type of meniscal surgery. Lysholm, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Short Form–12 physical component summary and mental component summary, Tegner activity scale, and patient satisfaction scores were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. The failure of meniscal repair was defined as a retear of the meniscus that was confirmed arthroscopically. Results: There were 43 patients (16 female, 27 male) in the meniscal repair group and 62 patients (25 female, 37 male) in the control group. Follow-up was obtained in 93% of patients with a mean of 3.0 years (range, 2.0-4.7 years). There was a significant improvement between all preoperative and postoperative outcome scores (P < .05) for both groups. The meniscal repair group had significantly lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores (P = .009 and P = .02, respectively). There were no significant differences between any other outcome scores preoperatively. The failure rate of the meniscal repair group was 2.7%, consisting of 1 symptomatic meniscal retear. There was no significant difference in any postoperative outcome score at a minimum 2-year follow-up between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Good to excellent patient-reported outcomes were reported for both groups with no significant differences in outcomes between the cohorts. Additionally, the failure rate for inside-out meniscal repair with concomitant multiligament reconstruction was low, regardless of meniscus laterality and tear characteristics. The use of multiple vertical mattress sutures and the biological augmentation resulting from intra-articular cruciate ligament reconstruction tunnel reaming may be partially responsible for the stability of the meniscal repair construct and thereby contribute to the overall improved outcomes and the low failure rate of meniscal repair, despite lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores in the meniscal repair group.

Meniscal survival rate after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BackgroundMeniscal suture provides well-documented benefits. Integrity of the cruciate ligaments of the knee is a prerequisite for meniscal healing. Nevertheless, reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) does not consistently prevent recurrent tearing of a sutured meniscus. We evaluated meniscal survival rates, 5 and 10 years after meniscal suture concomitant with an ACL reconstruction. We compared the outcomes of these repaired menisci to those in which no menisci tears were detected during ACL reconstruction. MethodsIn this multi-centric retrospective study, we included two groups. One group consists of patients who underwent a meniscal repair. This group was further divided into two subgroups based on whether follow-up was 5 years (n=76) or 10 years (n=39). The control group included 120 patients with normal menisci observed during surgery. We studied meniscal survival rates in each group, and we analyzed risk factors associated with the recurrence of meniscal lesions. ResultsThe 5-year meniscal survival rate was significantly higher in the control group than in the meniscal-repair group (95% vs. 80%, respectively; P=0.0029). The controls group also had a higher meniscal survival rate after 10 years, although the difference was not statistically significant (88% vs. 77%, P=0.07). A difference in knee laxity greater than 4mm was associated with a 5-fold increase in the risk of recurrent meniscal tears (P=0.0057). After 5 years, the risk of recurrence was higher for the medial than for the lateral meniscus, whereas after 10 years the difference was no longer statistically significant. DiscussionAlthough insufficient healing after meniscal suturing contributes to the risk of further meniscal tears, new lesions can develop in menisci that were undamaged at the time of ACL reconstruction. The risk of a new meniscal lesion is strongly associated with inadequate control of antero-posterior and rotational laxity. Some apparently “new menisci lesions” seems to have been missed during ACL reconstruction. Level of evidenceIV, retrospective study.

Meniscal repair in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a long-term outcome study

To study the long-term outcome of patients who have undergone inside-out, vertical stacked mattress suture repair of meniscal tears combined with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. From a database of ACL reconstructed patients, consecutive patients undergoing concomitant meniscal repair and ACL reconstruction between 1991 and 1999 were identified. Patients with previous ACL or meniscal pathology were excluded. Two age- and sex-matched cohorts who had undergone combined ACL reconstruction and menisectomy and who had undergone ACL reconstruction with normal menisci were identified for comparison. Outcome scoring included IKDC and Lysholm scores for the meniscal repair group. Two sample t-tests and chi-square tests were used to compare the IKDC subjective scores, with a minimum level of significance set at 5% (P=0.05). Fourty-four patients were identified for analysis with a median follow-up of 10years (7.7-12.6). Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction combined with meniscal repair had a mean IKDC of 84.2 compared with a mean score of 70.5 (P=0.008) in patients who had undergone menisectomy and 88.2 (P=0.005) in patients with intact menisci. 86.2% of patients with ACL reconstruction and meniscal repair had Lysholm score of between 80 and 100%. Sixty-nine percent follow-up was achieved. Survival analysis by life table method shows a best case of 89% 10-years survival. This study demonstrates that good long-term outcomes can be obtained in patients up to over 12years after combined ACL reconstruction and meniscal repair. Improved functional scores can be achieved when compared with ACL reconstruction and menisectomy. The authors advocate repair of meniscal tears during ACL reconstruction unless there is complex tearing, radial tearing or plastic deformation of the remaining meniscus. III.

膝半月術後の軟骨変化 再鏡視による検討

It is well known that meniscectomy leads to deterioration of the articular cartilage, since first reported by Fairbank in 1948. We studied articular cartilage changes after partial meniscectomy and meniscal repair evaluated by a second-look arthroscopy. Thirty-two menisci in 30 patients were studied. Chondral lesions were mostly found in the medial compartment before operation (70%), but after surgery deterioration rate of lateral chondral lesions (50%) was higher than medial chondral lesions (20%). The lateral compartment of the meniscectomy group became significantly worse in comparison to the meniscal repair group (67%). In a few cases, cartilage deteriorated even after lateral meniscal repair. No difference was found during both operations in the medial compartment (meniscectomy-17%, meniscal repair-21%)Cartilage deterioration was often seen after lateral meniscal Surgery. This is probably because joint pressure supported by the lateral meniscus is higher than in the medial meniscus, and lateral meniscal repair prevents mobility of the meniscus. Cartilage changes after lateral meniscal repair must be looked for carefully.

Anatomy and pathophysiology of the popliteal tendon area in the lateral meniscus: 2. Clinical investigation

Treatment of abnormal mobility of the popliteal tendon area of the lateral meniscus is described. Twenty-seven patients who exhibited an abnormally mobile posterior segment with no obvious ruptures in the lateral meniscus were directly examined by us after an average of 4 years and 3 months from the time of the arthroscopic procedure. The main comlaints associated with this condition before the surgery were pain and locking during deep knee flexions. The patients were divided into three groups according to surgical method: partial meniscectomy, subtotal meniscectomy, or meniscal repair. The subtotal meniscectomy and repair groups showed significantly higher scores than the partial meniscectomy group. A locking phenomenon recurred in one case of the meniscal repair group. In this case, the meniscofemoral coronary ligament posterior to the popliteal tunnel could not be sutured.