Meniscal repair results in inferior short-term outcomes compared with meniscal resection: a cohort study of 6398 patients with primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Does concomitant meniscus repair and meniscectomy show different efficacy in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

Currently, it is advised to perform meniscal repair instead of meniscectomy in certain cases of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, the level of evidence is low. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness of meniscectomy and meniscus repair in addition to ACLR.

Methods

The systematic search was conducted in three online databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane) from inception until October 2021 for the literature on primary ACLR and concomitant meniscal surgery. Eligible studies compared the following outcomes between meniscal repair and meniscectomy groups: the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and KT-arthrometer examinations. Lastly, we calculated pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) from the change between pre- and post-intervention values.

Results

Of 10,565 studies, 22 met the inclusion criteria, with a follow-up between 6 and 43 months. We found no difference when comparing the KOOS subscale changes-only in the KOOS pain subscale (MD = -1.6; CI: -2.48, -0.72). However, these results were not clinically significant. We analyzed the lateral and media meniscal injuries separately and concluded the same results regarding KOOS changes. We found no significant differences in the Lysholm score change (MD = -2.61; CI: -5.51, 0.29), changes in IKDC score (MD = 1.08; CI: -4.05, 6.21) or the change for the KT-arthrometer side-to-side difference (MD = -0.50; CI: -1.06, 0.06).

Conclusion

Based on our result, we did not find a clinically significant difference between meniscus repair and meniscectomy during primary ACLR regarding patient-reported outcomes in a short-term follow-up.

Translational potential

Our research supports the prompt integration of findings into clinical practice for treating meniscus injuries during ACL reconstruction. We recommend considering both meniscus repair and meniscectomy, as the available data indicate their effectiveness. Further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impacts, particularly on osteoarthritis, and to identify patient subgroups that may benefit most from each technique.

The Addition of the Gracilis Tendon to a Semitendinosus Tendon Autograft Is Not Associated With Knee Muscle Strength, Subjective Knee Function, or Revision Surgery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare isokinetic knee muscle (extension and flexion) strength, single-leg hop (SLH) test performance, anterior knee laxity, subjective knee function, and the 2-year revision surgery risk between patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with semitendinosus tendon (ST) autografts and patients who underwent ACLR with ST and gracilis tendon (ST-G) autografts.

METHODS

We identified patients aged 16 years or older who underwent primary ACLR with hamstring tendon autografts at our institution from January 2005 to December 2020 and had no associated ligament injuries. Isokinetic knee muscle strength and SLH test performance were assessed 6 months postoperatively. Anterior knee laxity (KT-1000 arthrometer, 134 N) was assessed preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was collected preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Patients who underwent revision ACLR at any institution in Sweden within 2 years of primary surgery were identified through the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry.

RESULTS

A total of 6,974 patients (5,479 with ST and 1,495 with ST-G) were included. There were no significant differences in extension and flexion strength or SLH test performance between the groups. Preoperatively, there was no significant difference in knee laxity between the ST and ST-G groups. Postoperatively, the ST-G group had significantly increased mean side-to-side (STS) laxity (2.1 ± 2.3 mm vs 1.7 ± 2.2 mm, P < .001) and showed a trend toward increased STS laxity according to the International Knee Documentation Committee form, with significantly fewer patients with STS laxity of 2 mm or less (58.4% vs 65.8%) and significantly more patients with STS laxity between 3 and 5 mm (35.0% vs 29.9%) or greater than 5 mm (6.6% vs 4.3%) (P < .001). The only significant difference in subjective knee function was for the KOOS Quality of Life subscale score in favor of the ST group preoperatively (37.3 ± 21.4 vs 35.1 ± 19.9, P = .001). No other significant differences between the groups were found preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively for any of the KOOS subscales. The overall revision ACLR rate within 2 years of primary surgery was 2.0% (138 of 6,974 patients). The revision ACLR risk in the ST-G group (1.7%, 25 of 1,495 patients) was not significantly different from that in the ST group (2.1%, 113 of 5,479 patients) (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.24; P = .32).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of the gracilis tendon to an ST autograft was not associated with knee muscle strength, SLH test performance, subjective knee function, or the risk of revision surgery after ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture Combined with Complete Radial Tear of the Posterior Horn of the Lateral Meniscus: Suture or Resection?

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture often presents with a tear of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus. There is no clear preference between ACL reconstruction with suture and resection of the meniscus. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of ACL reconstruction with suture versus resection in patients presenting with arthroscopic ACL rupture and radial complete tear of the posterior corner of the lateral meniscus. We retrospectively analyzed 157 patients with ACL rupture and complete radial tear of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus. Between May 2010 and April 2015, 86 of 157 patients underwent ACL reconstruction and meniscus suture (study group, 54.78%) and 71 of 157 patients underwent ACL reconstruction and meniscus resection (control group, 45.22%) in our department. All patients were monitored over the 12 to 72-month follow-up period. The primary evaluation indices were the Lysholm scores, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, pivot shift test, the Barret criteria, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of meniscal healing. The majority of 157 patients were relatively young men (29.64 ± 7.79 years) with low body mass index (BMI) (23.79 ± 2.74). The postoperative Lysholm and IKDC scores of the two groups were significantly improved over the corresponding preoperative scores (p < 0.05). The clinical results and excellent and good rates were significantly better for the study group than for the control group (both, p < 0.05). MRI showed that the meniscal healed rate of the study group was 96.51%. There was no significant difference in BMI between subgroups for any functional outcome. For patients with ACL rupture and complete radial tear of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus, ACL reconstruction and both simultaneous suture and resection of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus were found to be safe and effective. There was no association between outcomes and BMI. However, the former was associated with a superior long-term clinical effect and may restore the integrity of the meniscus and is particularly recommended for young patients.

Influence of Graft Type and Meniscal Involvement on Short-Term Outcomes Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

CONTEXT

The purpose of this study was to compare short-term clinical outcomes between meniscus procedures performed with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), ACLR (ACLR-only), ACLR with meniscectomy/resection (ACLR-resect), and ACLR with meniscal repair (ACLR-repair) for bone patellar tendon bone grafts (BPTB) and hamstring tendon grafts, separately.

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional study conducted in a controlled laboratory setting as part of a large point-of-care collaborative research program.

METHODS

This study included 314 participants (168 females; mean [SD]: age, 19.7 [4.8]) with primary unilateral ACLR with a BPTB or hamstring tendon. Patients were divided into 3 groups depending on meniscal procedure (ACLR-only, ACLR-resect, and ACLR-repair). Postsurgical testing included: isokinetic assessment of knee extension and flexion, single-leg hop tests, and patient-reported outcomes. Multivariate analysis of covariance compared differences between meniscal procedures on the battery of tests, and for each statistically significant variable an analysis of covariance assessed the effect of meniscal procedure within each graft type. Chi-square analysis assessed the influence of meniscal procedure on tests' pass rates defined as 90% of limb symmetry index.

RESULTS

BPTB: ACLR-only had greater hamstring strength than ACLR-resect (P = .05) and ACLR-repair (P = .005). ACLR-only had the highest proportion of participants to pass the hamstring strength test (P = .02). Hamstring tendon: ACLR-only (P = .03) and ACLR-resect (P = .003) had higher International Knee Documentation Committee scale scores than ACLR-repair. There was a significant difference in the proportion of participants who scored >90% limb symmetry index on the timed hop test (P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of meniscal repair on clinical outcomes is dependent on the graft choice. Following an ACLR with BPTB and a meniscal procedure, hamstring function should be more closely monitored for optimal short-term recovery.

The Effect of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in an ACL-Reconstructed Knee With Partial Medial Meniscectomy: A Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

Knee laxity increases with medial meniscectomy in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-reconstructed knees; however, the biomechanical effect of an additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is unknown.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine the kinematic effect of a LET in knees that underwent combined ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) and partial medial meniscus posterior horn (MMPH) meniscectomy. It was hypothesized that the addition of LET would reduce laxity in the ACL-reconstructed knee.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Ten fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees (mean age, 41.5 years) were tested using a robotic system under 3 loads: (1) 89.0 N of anterior tibial (AT) load, (2) 5 N·m of internal rotation (IR) tibial torque, and (3) a simulated pivot shift-a combined valgus of 7 N·m and IR torque of 5 N·m-at 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. Kinematic data were acquired in 4 states: (1) intact, (2) ACL-R, (3) ACL-R + partial MMPH meniscectomy (MMPH), and (4) ACL-R + partial MMPH meniscectomy + LET (MMPH+LET).

RESULTS

In response to AT loading, there was a significant increase seen in AT translation (ATT) in the MMPH state at all knee flexion angles compared with the ACL-R state, with the highest increase at 90° of knee flexion (mean difference, 3.1 mm) (P < .001). Although there was a significant decrease in ATT at 15° of knee flexion with MMPH+LET (P = .022), no significant differences were found at other knee flexion angles (P > .05). In MMPH with IR torque, a significant increase was observed in IR at all knee flexion angles except 90° compared with the ACL-R state (range, 2.8°-4.9°), and this increase was significantly decreased at all flexion angles with the addition of LET (range, 0.7°-1.6°) (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Performing a partial MMPH meniscectomy increased ATT and IR in response to AT and IR loads compared with the isolated ACL-R state in a cadaveric model. However, when the LET procedure was performed after partial MMPH meniscectomy, a significant decrease was seen at all knee flexion angles except 90° in response to IR and torque, and a significant decrease was seen at 15° of knee flexion in response to AT load.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

LET may be a useful adjunct procedure after ACL-R with partial MMPH meniscectomy to reduce knee laxity.

Differences in postoperative knee function based on concomitant treatment of lateral meniscal injury in the setting of primary ACL reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Concomitant lateral meniscal (LM) injuries are common in acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures. However, the effect of addressing these injuries with various treatment methods during primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2-, 5-, and 10-years after isolated primary ACLR to primary ACLR with various treatment methods to address concomitant LM injury.

METHODS

This study was based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Patients ≥ 15 years with data on postoperative KOOS who underwent primary ACLR between the years 2005 and 2018 were included in this study. The study population was divided into five groups: 1) Isolated ACLR, 2) ACLR + LM repair, 3) ACLR + LM resection, 4) ACLR + LM injury left in situ, and 5) ACLR + LM repair + LM resection. Patients with concomitant medial meniscal or other surgically treated ligament injuries were excluded.

RESULTS

Of 31,819 included patients, 24% had LM injury. After post hoc comparisons, significantly lower scores were found for the KOOS Symptoms subscale in ACLR + LM repair group compared to isolated ACLR (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.0097) and ACLR + LM injury left in situ groups (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.041) at 2-year follow-up. However, at 10-year follow-up, no differences were found between ACLR + LM repair and isolated ACLR, but ACLR + LM resection resulted in significantly lower KOOS Symptoms scores compared to isolated ACLR (80.4 vs 82.3, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that LM injury during ACLR is associated with lower KOOS scores, particularly in the Symptoms subscale, at short- and long-term follow-up. However, this finding falls below minimal clinical important difference and therefore may not be clinically relevant.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Clinical, Biomechanical, and Self-reported Health Status After ACL Reconstruction With Meniscal Repair in Soccer Players: Results at Minimum 1-Year Follow-up

Background

Performing meniscal repair with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been shown to contribute to the long-term preservation of knee health and gait biomechanics.

Purpose

To evaluate the role of meniscal repair in the performance of semiprofessional soccer players who returned to sport after ACLR.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

This study included 51 male soccer players (mean ± SD age, 28.82 ± 5.33 years) who underwent ACLR at a single institution between July 2018 and July 2019. The players were divided into 3 groups according to surgery type: ACLR only (n = 30), ACLR with lateral meniscal repair (n = 9), and ACLR with medial meniscal repair (n = 12). Outcomes were evaluated through clinical examination, self-reported health questionnaires (Cincinnati Knee Rating System, Tegner activity score, Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, and ACL-Return to Sport After Injury), and biomechanical performance evaluations (balance, strength, coordination, and symmetry tests). Parametric and nonparametric tests were carried out for multiple comparisons.

Results

The mean ± SD follow-up time was 20.75 ± 9.38 months. Although no significant differences emerged in clinical and self-reported health status, almost all the physical parameters tested resulted in lower performance in players treated with ACLR and meniscal repair. Moreover, patients with ACLR with lateral meniscal repair reported higher pain and fear of reinjury, with lower outcomes in terms of strength, symmetry, and coordination as compared with the other 2 groups. Balance abilities were significantly affected in players who underwent meniscal repair as compared with those who underwent ACLR only.

Conclusion

The findings showed that biomechanical performance measures and fear of reinjury were significantly worse in soccer players with associated meniscal repair at a minimum 1-year follow-up, especially in those with a lateral meniscal tear.

The Modified PROMT Score: A Better Prognosticative Tool to Assess Traumatic Meniscal Tear Reparability

Background

Considering various factors that influence meniscal repairability, Ortho One PROMT score (OPS) was proposed in 2019. With an increased understanding of factors influencing meniscal repair and by analysis of OPS predictions and repair results, a modified PROMT score (MPS) has been formulated. The objective of this study is to assess the superiority of MPS over OPS.

Methods

Age, chronicity, and pattern of tears were found to be important contributors to false-negative results of OPS. Considering these factors, MPS was designed. A prospective, double-blinded study was conducted between November 2020 and May 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of both scores were calculated. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted.

Results

Of 133 meniscal tears, 100 met the inclusion criteria. In predicting meniscal repairability, OPS demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 90.32% and 83.33% medially and 64.71% and 79.41% laterally. MPS had sensitivity and specificity of 96.77% and 88.89% medially and 82.35% and 88.24% laterally. Both scores showed good statistical significance (p < 0.05) in predicting meniscal reparability. For medial meniscus repairability, area under the ROC curve was 0.868 for OPS and 0.928 for MPS. For lateral repairability, the area under the curve was 0.721 for OPS and 0.853 for MPS.

Conclusion

MPS will serve as a simple and more effective tool for surgeons to predict meniscal repairability, thus enhancing their pre-surgical preparedness. This tool will also help surgeons to realistically counsel their patients and to achieve optimal patient.

Machine Learning Model Identifies Preoperative Opioid Use, Male Sex, and Elevated BMI as Predictive Factors for of Prolonged Opioid Consumption Following Arthroscopic Meniscal Surgery

PURPOSE

To develop a predictive machine learning model to identify prognostic factors for continued opioid prescriptions after arthroscopic meniscus surgery.

METHODS

Patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery, such as meniscus debridement, repair, or revision at a single institution from 2013 to 2017 were retrospectively followed up to 1 year postoperatively. Procedural details were recorded, including concomitant procedures, primary versus revision, and whether a partial debridement or a repair was performed. Intraoperative arthritis severity was measured using the Outerbridge Classification. The number of opioid prescriptions in each month was recorded. Primary analysis used was the multivariate Cox-Regression model. We then created a naïve Bayesian model, a machine learning classifier that uses Bayes' theorem with an assumption of independence between variables.

RESULTS

A total of 581 patients were reviewed. Postoperative opioid refills occurred in 98 patients (16.9%). Multivariate logistic modeling was used; independent risk factors for opioid refills included male sex, larger body mass index, and chronic preoperative opioid use, while meniscus resection demonstrated decreased likelihood of refills. Concomitant procedures, revision procedures, and presence of arthritis graded by the Outerbridge classification were not significant predictors of postoperative opioid refills. The naïve Bayesian model for extended postoperative opioid use demonstrated good fit with our cohort with an area under the curve of 0.79, sensitivity of 94.5%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 83%, and a detection rate of 78.2%. The two most important features in the model were preoperative opioid use and male sex.

CONCLUSION

After arthroscopic meniscus surgery, preoperative opioid consumption and male sex were the most significant predictors for sustained opioid use beyond 1 month postoperatively. Intraoperative arthritis was not an independent risk factor for continued refills. A machine learning algorithm performed with high accuracy, although with a high false positive rate, to function as a screening tool to identify patients filling additional narcotic prescriptions after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative study.

Meniscal repair at the time of primary ACLR does not negatively influence short term knee stability, graft rupture rates, or patient-reported outcome measures: the STABILITY experience

PURPOSE

To assess how meniscal repair and excision impact short term patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), knee stability, and early graft rupture rates following primary hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with or without lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in a group of young active patients where meniscal repair is commonly advocated.

METHODS

Six hundred and eighteen patients under 25 years of age at high-risk of graft failure following ACLR were recruited to the Stability 1 study. Multivariable regression models were developed to identify statistically and clinically significant surgical and demographic predictors of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC), ACL Quality of Life Questionnaire (ACL-QOL) and Marx Activity Rating Scale (MARS) scores. Chi-Square tests of independence were used to explore the association between meniscal status (torn, not torn), meniscal treatment (excision or repair), graft rupture, and rotatory knee laxity.

RESULTS

Medial meniscus repair was associated with worse outcomes on the KOOS (β = -1.32, 95% CI: -1.57 to -1.10, p = 0.003), IKDC (β = -1.66, 95% CI: -1.53 to -1.02, p = 0.031) and ACL-QOL (β = -1.25, 95% CI: -1.61 to 1.02, p = n.s.). However, these associations indicated small, clinically insignificant changes based on reported measures of clinical relevance. Other important predictors of post-operative PROMs included age, sex, and baseline scores. Medial meniscus excision and lateral meniscus treatment (repair or excision) did not have an important influence on PROMs. There was no significant association between meniscal treatment and graft rupture or rotatory knee laxity.

CONCLUSION

While repairing the medial meniscus may result in a small reduction in PROM scores at two-year follow-up, these differences are not likely to be important to patients or clinicians. Any surgical morbidity associated with meniscal repair appears negligible in terms of PROMs. Meniscal repair does not affect rotatory laxity or graft failure rates in the short term. Therefore, meniscal repair should likely be maintained as the standard of care for concomitant meniscal tears with ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Scoping Review on ACL Surgery and Registry Data

Purpose of Review

To present an overview of registry-based anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) research, as well as provide insight into the future of ACL registries.

Recent Findings

During the past decades, the ACL registries have had an important role in increasing our understanding of patients with ACL injuries and their treatment. The registry data has deepened our understanding of factors that have been associated with an increased risk of sustaining an ACL injury and for evaluation of treatment factors and their impact on patient-related outcomes. Recently, registry-based ACL research using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) has shown potential to create clinical decision-making tools and analyzing outcomes. Thus, standardization of collected data between the registries is needed to facilitate the further collaboration between registries and to facilitate the interpretation of results and subsequently improve the possibilities for implementation of AI and ML in the registry-based research.

Summary

Several studies have been based on the current ACL registries providing an insight into the epidemiology of ACL injuries as well as outcomes following ACL reconstruction. However, the current ACL registries are facing future challenges, and thus, new methods and techniques are needed to ensure further good quality and clinical applicability of study findings based on ACL registry data.

Different injury patterns exist among patients undergoing operative treatment of isolated PCL, combined PCL/ACL, and isolated ACL injuries: a study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

PURPOSE

To compare demographic characteristics and concomitant injury patterns in patients undergoing primary isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCL-R) and combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (PCL-R/ACL-R) with isolated ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) as a reference using data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR).

METHODS

This cohort study based on the SNKLR comprised patients undergoing either PCL-R, ACL-R, or combined PCL-R/ACL-R between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2019 in Sweden. Demographic and surgery-related data with regards to injury mechanism, concomitant intraarticular lesions and their treatment, neurovascular damage, and concomitant ligamentous injuries were extracted. Exclusion criteria included concomitant fractures of the femur, fibula, patella or tibia, and quadriceps or patellar tendon injury.

RESULTS

A total of 45,564 patients were included in this study. Isolated PCL-R, combined PCL-R/ACL-R, and isolated ACL-R were performed in 192 (0.4%), 203 (0.5%) and 45,169 (99.1%) patients, respectively. Sports were identified as the cause of 64% of PCL-Rs, 54% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs, and 89% of ACL-Rs, while a traffic-related mechanism was identified in 20% of PCL-Rs, 27% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs and 2% of ACL-Rs. Meniscus injury prevalence was 45% in ACL-Rs, 31% in PCL-R/ACL-Rs and 16% in isolated PCL-Rs (p < 0.001). Cartilage injuries were more common in PCL-R (37%) and PCL-R/ACL-R patients (40%) compared to ACL-R patients (26%, p < 0.001). Concomitant knee ligament injury was identified in 28-44% of PCL-R/ACL-R patients. Neurovascular injuries were present in 9% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs, 1% of PCL-Rs, and 0.3% of ACL-Rs (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Differences in injury mechanisms among patient groups confirm that operatively treated PCL tears are frequently caused by both traffic and sports. Cartilage and ligament injuries were more frequent in patients with PCL-R compared to ACL-R. Consequently, combined PCL and ACL tears should raise suspicion for concomitant knee lesions with clinical relevance during the operative treatment of these complex injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Failed meniscal repair increases the risk for osteoarthritis and poor knee function at an average of 9 years follow-up

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of meniscal repair on OA in the knee joint and patient-related outcomes.

METHODS

Three-hundred and sixteen meniscal repairs performed between 1999 and 2011 were analysed. Patient-related outcome measures were assessed through mailed questionnaires including KOOS, Lysholm score and Tegner activity level. Patients answering the questionnaires were encouraged to perform a radiographic evaluation with Rosenberg views, assessed according to Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification. The primary endpoint was to determine the effect of meniscal repair on the development of radiographic OA defined as a KL grade 2 or more.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 9.3 years (SD 3.6), 162 (51%) patients answered the questionnaires, and 86 patients completed the X-ray. The odds ratio for OA with a failed meniscus repair was 5.1 (p = 0.007) adjusted for gender and age at time of follow-up. KOOS showed a clinically important difference in the sport and recreation subscale (p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

There was an increased risk for OA in the affected compartment with a failed meniscus fixation. This supports the fact that the meniscus is an important protector of the cartilage in the knee. The meniscus injury affects the long-term health-related quality of life according to KOOS and in light of this study we recommend repair of a torn meniscus whenever possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

All-Cause Failure Rates Increase With Time Following Meniscal Repair Despite Favorable Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to perform a meta-analysis of studies reporting meniscus repair outcomes. Pooled analyses of such studies will provide an accurate estimate of the outcomes that can be expected following meniscal repair at various postoperative time points.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of meniscal repair failure (defined as persistent symptoms, lack of healing on magnetic resonance imaging or revision surgery) and other clinical outcomes was performed following meniscal repair. Patients included had traumatic, nondegenerative meniscal tears, were skeletally mature, and had specific time-points after surgery. Repairs included were performed either in isolation, or with concomitant ACL reconstruction. Because of the inherent heterogeneity of single-arm meta-analyses, pooled analyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Rates of all-cause meniscal repair failure was pooled to be 12% at 0-1 years (95% CI: .09-.16), 15% at 2-3 years (95% CI: .11-.20), and 19% at 4-6 years (95% CI: .13-.24). Sensitivity analysis for studies performing meniscal repair entirely on patients with concomitant ACL reconstruction (ACLR) showed comparable rates of failure at similar time intervals. Development of osteoarthritis, in patients with knees previously free from articular pathologies, was 4% at 2-3 years (95% CI: .02-.07), and 10% at 4-6 years (95% CI: .03-.25).

CONCLUSION

Meniscus repair for traumatic injuries have an all-cause failure rate that increases from 12% to 19% through a time period ranging from 1-6 years following surgery. The failure rates were comparable for patients with meniscal repairs performed with concomitant ACLRs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic Review of Level II-IV Studies.

Current and future of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques

In recent years, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has generally yielded favorable outcomes. However, ACL reconstruction has not provided satisfactory results in terms of the rate of returning to sports and prevention of osteoarthritis (OA) progression. In this paper, we outline current techniques for ACL reconstruction such as graft materials, double-bundle or single-bundle reconstruction, femoral tunnel drilling, all-inside technique, graft fixation, preservation of remnant, anterolateral ligament reconstruction, ACL repair, revision surgery, treatment for ACL injury with OA and problems, and discuss expected future trends. To enable many more orthopedic surgeons to achieve excellent ACL reconstruction outcomes with less invasive surgery, further studies aimed at improving surgical techniques are warranted. Further development of biological augmentation and robotic surgery technologies for ACL reconstruction is also required.

The effect of meniscal pathology and management with ACL reconstruction on patient-reported outcomes, strength, and jump performance ten months post-surgery

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in patient-reported outcome measures, isokinetic strength, plyometric ability and ability to meet return to play criteria ten months after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery between those who underwent meniscectomy, those who underwent meniscal repair and those with no meniscal intervention alongside ACL reconstruction surgery.

METHODS

Three hundred and thirteen athletes with clinically and radiologically confirmed ACL ruptures were included in this study. Participants were grouped according to their intra-operative procedures (isolated ACL reconstruction surgery n = 155, ACL reconstruction surgery with meniscectomy n = 128, ACL reconstruction surgery with meniscal repair n = 30). Participants completed patient-reported outcome measures questionnaires (Marx Activity Rating Scale, the ACL Return to Sport after Injury and the International Knee Documentation Committee Score) and completed a battery of objective functional testing including isokinetic dynamometry and jump performance testing (countermovement jump and drop jump) between 9 and 11 months after surgery.

RESULTS

No significant between-group differences were identified in any metric relating to patient-reported outcome measures (p = .611), strength and jump measures (p = .411) or the ability to achieve symmetry-based return to play criteria (p = .575).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically, these results suggest that concomitant meniscal surgery has no significant effects on patient-reported outcome measures, strength and jump metrics at the return to play stage post-operatively and can inform the pre-operative counselling of those awaiting ACL reconstruction surgery with likely meniscal intervention.

Use of the forgotten joint score (FJS)-12 to evaluate knee awareness after isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without meniscus repair or partial meniscectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare knee awareness, based on the FJS-12 score, among three patient groups: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), ACLR + meniscus repair and ACLR + partial meniscectomy. The relationship between FJS-12 scores and scores on other instruments (Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale, KOOS and WOMAC) was also evaluated.

METHODS

Forty-three patients were divided into group A (isolated ACLR) group B (ACLR + meniscectomy) and group C (ACLR + meniscus repair). Graft thickness, femoral tunnel width, tibial tunnel width, tibial screw thickness and follow-up time were evaluated in all three groups. The subjective knee scores (KOOS, WOMAC, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale and FJS-12) of the groups were then compared.

RESULTS

FJS-12 scores of 43 patients were evaluated. The mean age was 26.1 ± 6.5 years (range: 18-40 years). Group A: 23; group B: 9 and group C include 11 patients. The mean FJS-12 score of group B (median: 100 [range: 98-100]) was higher than that the others. Spearman's rho test showed that the FJS-12 is highly compatible with the other scores.

CONCLUSION

According to this study, FJS-12 and the other scoring systems showed that ACLR with partial meniscectomy is the most effective surgical method to restore normal sensation in the knee.

Effect of Tibial Tunnel Placement Using the Lateral Meniscus as a Landmark on Clinical Outcomes of Anatomic Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear if use of the lateral meniscus anterior horn (LMAH) as a landmark will produce consistent tunnel positions in the anteroposterior (AP) distance across the tibial plateau.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the AP location of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction tibial tunnels utilizing the LMAH as an intra-articular landmark and to examine how tunnel placement affects knee stability and clinical outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of 98 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with quadrupled hamstring tendon autografts between March 2013 and June 2017. Patients with unilateral ACL injuries and a minimum follow-up of 2 years were included in the study. All guide pins for the tibial tunnel were placed using the posterior border of the LMAH as an intra-articular landmark. Guide pins were evaluated with the Bernard-Hertel grid in the femur and the Stäubli-Rauschning method in the tibia. Patients were divided by the radiographic location of the articular entry point of the guide pin with relation to the anterior 40% of the tibial plateau. Outcomes were evaluated by the Marx Activity Scale and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Anterior knee laxity was evaluated using a KT-1000 arthrometer and graded with the objective portion of the IKDC form. Rotational stability was evaluated using the pivot-shift test.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were available for follow-up at a mean 28.6 months. The overall percentage of AP placement of the tibial tunnel was 39.3% ± 3.8% (mean ± SD; range, 31%-47%). Side-to-side difference of anterior knee laxity was significantly lower in the anterior group than the posterior group (1.2 ± 1.1 mm vs 2.5 ± 1.3 mm; P < .001; r = 0.51). The percentage of AP placement of the tibial tunnel demonstrated a positive medium correlation with side-to-side difference of anterior knee laxity as measured by a KT-1000 arthrometer (r = 0.430; P < .001). The anterior group reported significantly better distribution of IKDC grading as compared with the posterior group (26 grade A and 6 grade B vs 15 grade A and 13 grade B; P = .043; V = 0.297). The pivot-shift test results and outcome scores showed no significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Using the posterior border of the LMAH as an intraoperative landmark yields a wide range of tibial tunnel locations along the tibial plateau, with anterior placement of the tibial tunnel leading toward improved anterior knee stability.

Which factors are associated with the prevalence of meniscal repair?

Abstract

Purpose To investigate the potential factors associated with the prevalence of meniscal repair

Methods Patients who received partial meniscectomy or meniscal repair in our institution from Jan 2015 to Dec 2019 were included in current study. The inclusion criteria were (1) meniscus tear treated using meniscectomy or repair, (2) with or without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, (3) not multiligamentous injury. Demographic data, including sex, age, body mass index (BMI), injury-to-surgery interval and intra-articular factors such as the location of injury, medial or lateral, ACL rupture or not and the option of procedure (partial meniscectomy or repair) were documented from medical records. Univariate analysis consisted of chi-square. Multivariate logistic regression was then performed to adjust for confounding factors.

Results 592 patients including 399 males and 193 females with a mean age of 28.7 years (range from 10 to 75 years) were included in current study. In the univariate analysis, male (p = 0.002), patients aged 40 years or younger (p < 0.001), increased weight (p = 0.010), Posterior meniscus torn (0.011), concurrent ACL ruputure (p < 0.001), lateral meniscus (p = 0.039) and early surgery (p < 0.001) were all associated with the prevalence of meniscal repair. However, After adjusting for confounding factors, we found that age (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17 - 0.68, p = 0.002), ACL injury (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.97 – 7.21, p < 0.001), side of menisci (OR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.43 – 7.55, p = 0.005), site of tear (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07 – 0.32, p < 0.001), and duration of injury (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.28 – 0.82, p = 0.008) were associated with the prevalence of meniscus repair.

Conclusions Meniscal tear in aged patients especially those with concomitant ACL injury is likely to be repaired. Additionally, in order to increase the prevalence of repair and slow down progression of OA, the surgical procedure should be performed within two weeks after meniscus tear especially when the tear is located at lateral meniscal posterior.

Study design

Case-control study; level of evidence, 3.

The predictive factors that are associated with the number of sutures used during meniscal repair

Purpose

To investigate factors associated with the consumption of a large number of sutures during arthroscopic meniscus repair procedures.

Methods

All patients who received meniscal repair, with or without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2019 were included in the current study. Demographic data (sex, age, body mass index (BMI), and injury-to-surgery interval) and surgical data (the site of the tear, side of the meniscus, presence of an ACL rupture or not and the number of sutures) were retrospectively collected from our medical records. The number of sutures was divided into two groups (1–2 sutures versus > 2 sutures). The stitching process was implemented through an all-inside technique using a meniscal repair device (Fast-Fix; Smith & Nephew). According to the length and stability of the meniscal tear, one to seven sutures were used. Univariate analysis consisted of chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression was then performed to adjust for confounding factors.

Results

A total of 242 patients, including 168 males and 57 females, was finally included. In the univariate analysis, we found that those patients who underwent meniscus repair within one month after meniscus tear were more likely to need fewer sutures than those who underwent surgery more than one month after injury (70/110 versus 59/115, p=0.062). In total, 75/109 (68.8%) lateral meniscal tears were repaired with fewer sutures than medial (34/72, 47.2%) and bilateral meniscus injuries (20/44, 45.4%; p=0.003). In the multivariate analysis, we found that the duration of injury (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.16–3.64, p=0.013), presence of an ACL injury (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.97–7.21, p< 0.001) and the side of the meniscus (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14–0.65, p=0.002) were associated with the number of sutures used during meniscal repair procedures.

Conclusions

Patients who underwent meniscal repair within one month after meniscus tear, especially lateral menisci tears, were more likely to need fewer sutures.

Study design

Case-control study; level of evidence, 3.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Subsequent Meniscal Surgery After Successful Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Study With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

One of the goals of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a meniscal protective effect on the knee. Despite the advancement of ACL reconstruction techniques, subsequent meniscal tears after ACL reconstruction remain a problem, and the risk factors for recurring lesions are still unclear.

PURPOSE

To investigate the incidence of subsequent meniscal surgery after primary ACL reconstruction without revision ACL surgery and to determine the risk factors associated with this reoperation.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Overall, 518 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction between 2004 and 2012 at one instution participated in this study. Data on body mass index, graft type and femoral tunnel-drilling technique of ACL reconstruction, and location and type of meniscal injury and its treatment at ACL reconstruction were collected from medical records. Clinical outcomes were investigated, including side-to-side difference of anterior laxity, pivot-shift grade, and subsequent meniscal surgery without ACL insufficiency (at minimum 2-year follow-up).

RESULTS

The prevalence of tears to the medial meniscus (MM) at the primary ACL reconstruction was 43.6% (226/518), 140 of which were repaired; on the contrary, tears of the lateral meniscus (LM) had a prevalence of 55.8% (289/518), 42 of which were repaired. At a mean 30.3 months (range, 8-124 months) after ACL reconstruction, 20 patients (3.9%; 14 MM tears, 3 LM tears, 3 MM + LM tears) required meniscal surgery without ACL reinjury or recurrence of instability. Of these, 14 MMs and 3 LMs had been repaired at primary ACL reconstruction. The failure rates of repaired MM and LM were 10.0% (14/140) and 7.1% (3/42), respectively. The failure rate of MM repair using the all-inside technique (6/36) was significantly higher compared with no treatment, inside-out repair, or partial resection (P = .045). In multiple regression analysis, the presence of MM injury at the time of ACL reconstruction (odds ratio [OR], 7.81; P = .003), the side-to-side difference of postoperative anterior tibial translation (OR, 1.91; P = .032), and follow-up period after ACL reconstruction (OR, 1.02; P = .003) were risk factors of subsequent meniscal surgery after ACL reconstruction.

CONCLUSION

Incidence of subsequent meniscal surgery after successful ACL reconstruction was <5%. Presence of MM tear at the time of ACL reconsturuction, small amount of increased anterior laxity, and long-term period after ACL reconstruction were predictive of subsequent meniscal surgery.

Meniscus Repair Does Not Result in an Inferior Short-term Outcome Compared With Meniscus Resection: An Analysis of 5,378 Patients With Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare the preoperative and 1- and 2-year postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscale scores between isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and ACLR with additional medial meniscus (MM) and/or lateral meniscus (LM) resection or repair.

METHODS

A total of 5,378 patients who underwent primary ACLR, with no associated ligament injuries, at our institution from January 2005 to December 2015 were included. The KOOS subscale scores were used to evaluate patients preoperatively and at 1- and 2-year postoperative follow-up assessments. Patients who underwent isolated ACLR and those who underwent ACLR with additional MM resection, MM repair, LM resection, LM repair, MM plus LM resection, or MM plus LM repair were compared by use of an analysis of covariance, with age, sex, graft, and cartilage injury as covariates.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, at both 1- and 2-year follow-up assessments, no significant differences were found between the groups for any of the 5 KOOS subscales. Preoperatively, a significant difference between the groups was found for the KOOS Symptoms (P < .001), Pain (P < .001), Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (P < .001), and Sport and Recreation (Sport/Rec) (P = .01) subscale scores. The lowest scores were found for the group undergoing ACLR and MM plus LM repair (Symptoms, 70.1 ± 17.3; Pain, 71.4 ± 18.5; ADL, 80.6 ± 20.5; and Sport/Rec, 35.7 ± 28.1), whereas the mean scores for the other groups ranged from 71.2 ± 18.7 to 76.5 ± 17.1 for Symptoms, from 76.1 ± 17.0 to 80.1 ± 15.5 for Pain, from 84.5 ± 16.8 to 88.1 ± 14.2 for ADL, and from 44.2 ± 28.3 to 49.1 ± 28.5 for Sport/Rec.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing isolated ACLR and those undergoing ACLR with additional MM and/or LM resection or repair obtained equivalent results for each of the KOOS subscales at the 1- and 2-year postoperative follow-up assessments. Differences between the groups were only detectable preoperatively, with patients undergoing ACLR and MM plus LM repair showing the lowest scores for the KOOS Symptoms, Pain, ADL, and Sport/Rec subscales.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Editorial Commentary: Meniscal Repair-Why Bother?

Whether to repair or resect meniscal tears remains a matter of controversy. In theory, partial meniscectomy increases contact pressure, which may result in progressive and early cartilage degeneration and early osteoarthritis. Meniscal preservation is the preferred treatment option, but only a small percentage of meniscal tears are suitable for repair. Two recent registry studies challenge this approach and suggest that partial meniscectomy has similar clinical outcomes in the short term. Whether these findings can be maintained in the long term remains to be seen.

The effect of meniscal repair on strength deficits 6 months after ACL reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Ruptures of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) can be accompanied by meniscal lesions. Generally, the rehabilitation protocols are altered by meniscal repair. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of meniscal repair on the early recovery of thigh muscle strength in ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a matched cohort analysis of n = 122 isolated ACLR (CON) compared to n = 61 ACLR with meniscal repair (ACLR + MR). The subgroups of meniscal repair consisted of 30 patients who had undergone medial meniscus repairs (MM), 19 lateral meniscus repairs (LM) and 12 repairs of medial and lateral meniscus (BM). Isokinetic strength measurement was performed pre-operatively and 6 months post-surgery to perform a cross-sectional and a longitudinal analysis. All injuries were unilateral, and the outcome measures were compared to the non-affected contralateral leg.

RESULTS

Six months postoperatively overall there is no significant difference between the groups (extension strength MR 82% vs. CON 85% and flexion strength 86% vs. 88%, resp.). Subgroup analysis showed that medial repairs exhibit a comparable leg symmetry while lateral repairs performed worse with leg symmetry being 76% in extension and 81% in flexion strength. Patients undergoing BM repair performed in between lateral and medial repairs (82% extension, 86% flexion).

CONCLUSION

Generally, meniscal repair in conjunction with ACLR does not significantly alter the recovery of limb symmetry in strength at 6 months postoperatively. Interestingly, medial repairs seem to perform superior to lateral meniscal repair and repair of both menisci. Since the recovery of symmetric strength is a major factor in rehabilitation testing, these results will help to advise surgeons on appropriate rehabilitation protocols and setting realistic goals for the injured athlete.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective cohort study.

Management of traumatic meniscus tears: the 2019 ESSKA meniscus consensus

PURPOSE

The importance of meniscus integrity in the prevention of early osteoarthritis is well known, and preservation is accepted as the primary goal. The purpose of the ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) European consensus on traumatic meniscus tears was to provide recommendations for the treatment of meniscus tears based on both scientific evidence and the clinical experience of knee experts.

METHODS

Three groups of surgeons and scientists elaborated and ratified the so-called formal consensus process to define the recommendations for the management of traumatic meniscus tears. A traumatic meniscus tear was defined as a tear with an acute onset of symptoms caused by a sufficient trauma. The expert groups included a steering group of eight European surgeons and scientists, a rating group of another nineteen European surgeons, and a peer review group. The steering group prepared twenty-seven question and answer sets based on the scientific literature. The quality of the answers received grades of A (a high level of scientific support), B (scientific presumption), C (a low level of scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question and answer sets were then submitted to and evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 (= totally inappropriate) to 9 (= totally appropriate) points. Thereafter, the comments of the members of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the finalized question and answer sets were submitted for final review by the peer review group composed of representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies. Eighteen representatives replied.

RESULTS

The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears. Of the 27 questions, only one question received a grade of A (a high level of scientific support), and another received a grade of B (scientific presumption). The remaining questions received grades of C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.2 (95% confidence interval 8.1-8.4). A general agreement that MRI should be performed on a systematic basis was not achieved. However, MRI was recommended when arthroscopy would be considered to identify concomitant pathologies. In this case, the indication for MRI should be determined by a musculoskeletal specialist. Based on our data, stable left in situ lateral meniscus tears appear to show a better prognosis than medial tears. When repair is required, surgery should be performed as early as possible. Evidence that biological enhancement such as needling or the application of platelet-rich plasma would improve healing was not identified. Preservation of the meniscus should be considered as the first line of treatment because of an inferior clinical and radiological long-term outcome after partial meniscectomy compared to meniscus repair.

DISCUSSION

The consensus was generated to present the best possible recommendations for the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears and provides some groundwork for a clinical decision-making process regarding the treatment of meniscus tears. Preservation of the meniscus should be the first line of treatment when possible, because the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes are worse after partial meniscectomy than after meniscus preservation. The consensus clearly states that numerous meniscus tears that were considered irreparable should be repaired, e.g., older tears, tears in obese patients, long tears, etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Age, gender, quadriceps strength and hop test performance are the most important factors affecting the achievement of a patient-acceptable symptom state after ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

To assess the percentage of patients achieving an acceptable symptom state 2 years after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and to identify factors affecting its achievement, in a large cohort.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary ACLR at Capio Artro Clinic, Stockholm, Sweden, from 2005 to 2015, were identified in our clinic registry. Patients who had completed the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at the 2-year follow-up were included. The primary outcome was the achievement of a patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) for each KOOS subscale. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine whether patient age, gender, time from injury to surgery, pre-injury Tegner activity level, graft type, cartilage injury, the presence of medial meniscus (MM) or lateral meniscus (LM) resection or repair and the recovery of 6-month symmetrical (limb symmetry index [LSI] of ≥ 90%) isokinetic quadriceps or hamstring strength and single-leg-hop test performance were factors associated with the achievement of a PASS for each KOOS subscale.

RESULTS

A total of 2335 primary ACLRs were included. More than 60% of the patients reported a PASS on four of the five KOOS subscales. Age ≥ 30 years and an LSI of ≥ 90% for 6-month isokinetic quadriceps strength increased the odds of achieving a PASS across all KOOS subscales. Female gender reduced the odds of achieving a PASS on the Pain (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.62-0.94; P = 0.01), activities of daily living (ADL) (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.97; P = 0.02) and sport and recreation (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.58-0.89; P = 0.003) subscales. The presence of an MM repair reduced the odds of achieving a PASS on the Pain (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.36-0.96; P = 0.03) subscale. Hamstring tendon (HT) autograft rather than bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft showed increased odds (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.31-3.10; P = 0.001), whereas a cartilage injury showed reduced odds (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55-0.97; P = 0.03) of achieving a PASS on the sport and recreation subscale. An LSI of ≥ 90% for 6-month single-leg-hop test performance increased the odds of achieving a PASS on the ADL (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.09-1.71; P = 0.005), Sport and Recreation (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.11-1.77; P = 0.004), and quality of life (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.00-1.63; P = 0.04) subscales.

CONCLUSION

More than 60% of the patients reported an acceptable symptom state on four of the five KOOS subscales 2 years after primary ACLR. Age ≥ 30 years and female gender were the non-modifiable factors that consistently increased and reduced, respectively, the odds of achieving a PASS. A symmetrical 6-month isokinetic quadriceps strength and single-leg-hop test performance were the modifiable factors that consistently increased the opportunity of achieving a PASS 2 years after primary ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Functional and anatomical outcomes of single-stage arthroscopic bimeniscal replacement

BACKGROUND

Meniscal replacement by an allograft or scaffold has been proven effective in patients with post-meniscectomy pain syndrome. Replacement of both menisci is a rarely performed procedure about which little is known. The primary objective of this work was to assess the functional outcomes of arthroscopic bimeniscal replacement. The secondary objectives were to evaluate meniscal healing and the time-course of cartilage lesions.

HYPOTHESIS

Single-stage arthroscopic bimeniscal replacement provides good functional and anatomical outcomes, similar to those seen after replacement of a single meniscus, in adults with post-meniscectomy pain syndrome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Five patients received regular follow-up after single-stage arthroscopic bimeniscal replacement by an allograft and/or substitute, with or without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Median follow-up was 30 months (range, 24-68 months). Radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging scans of the knee obtained before surgery and at last follow-up were evaluated. The following parameters were recorded: KOOS and IKDC score, knee osteoarthritis, knee alignment, condition of the cartilage, healing of the meniscal replacement material, meniscal extrusion, and other complications.

RESULTS

Allografts were used to replace both menisci in 3 patients, whereas 2 patients received a lateral allograft and a medial scaffold. The median subjective IKDC score was 83.9 (range, 55.1-94.3) and the median objective IKDC score was B (range, A-C). The median global KOOS was 85.7 (range, 65.7-92.3). Extrusion occurred for one medial and two lateral menisci.

CONCLUSION

Bimeniscal replacement by an allograft and/or substitute provides good short-term functional and anatomical outcomes. Nevertheless, this procedure is warranted only in highly selected patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.