Meniscectomy is still a frequent orthopedic procedure: a pending need for education on the meniscus treatment possibilities

Advances in bioadhesives for meniscal repair: A comprehensive review and criteria for the ideal candidate

The latest studies agree that meniscal tears that require surgery should be repaired whenever possible to avoid early-onset osteoarthritis secondary to meniscectomy. Unfortunately, there are several limitations associated with meniscal sutures, making it difficult to put into practice the theory behind the concept of saving the meniscus. Meanwhile, there is an exponential growth in the use of tissue adhesives for surgery, but finding one suited to meniscal repair remains a struggle. This review has two main goals (1) to compile the various bioadhesives used in this field and (2) to list the criteria for an ideal meniscal bioadhesive. The review was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science in November 2023 without date restrictions. The inclusion criteria were: Studies published in English and focusing on meniscal repair using bioadhesives. The exclusion criteria were: Studies published in languages other than English. Adhesives used in combination with sutures, as the aim was to determine the adhesive's capabilities for meniscal repair alone. Synthetic adhesives such as polycyanoacrylates, polyethylene glycol, polyurethanes, and polyesters. Among the 11 bioadhesives found, fibrin is the only one that has been studied in humans. There are advantages and disadvantages to all the bioadhesives identified but none that fully meet the requirements for meniscal repair. The anatomy of meniscal tissue is complex and poses unique challenges that are compounded by arthroscopic stresses. The future of meniscal repair probably lies in combining the advantages of several bioadhesives, and this area should be the focus of future research.

Animal models used in meniscal repair research from ex vivo to in vivo: A systematic review

This systematic review, registered with Prospero, aims to identify an optimal animal model for meniscus repair research, moving from ex vivo experimentation to in vivo studies. Data sources included PubMed, Medline, all Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, Web of Science, and Embase searched in March 2023. Studies were screened using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extracted data including animal model, type of experiment, type of tear, surgical techniques, and measured outcomes, were recorded, reviewed, and analyzed by four independent reviewers. The SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) Rob tool was used for critical appraisal and risk of bias assessment. Out of 11,719 studies, 72 manuscripts were included for data extraction and analysis; 41 ex vivo extra-articular studies, 20 ex vivo intra-articular studies, and only 11 in vivo studies. Six animal models were employed: porcine, bovine, lapine, caprine, canine, and ovine. Longitudinal lesions were the most frequently studied tear pattern and sutures the most common repair technique. Studied outcomes focused mainly on biomechanical assessments and gross observations. This systematic review can guide researchers in their choice of animal model for meniscus repair research; it highlighted the strengths of the porcine, caprine, and bovine models for ex vivo cadaveric studies, while the porcine and caprine models were found to be more suited to in vivo studies due to their similarities with human anatomy. Research teams should familiarize themselves with the advantages and disadvantages of various animal models before initiating protocols to improve standardization in the field.

Emerging biologic augmentation strategies for meniscal repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Meniscal repair should be the gold standard. However, the meniscus is poorly vascularized and even an excellent meniscus repair may not heal. Therefore, numerous studies and systematic reviews have been carried out on platelet-rich plasma (PRP), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and fibrin clots for meniscal augmentation, but the results remain controversial. This systematic review aimed to identify other emerging strategies for meniscal repair augmentation and to assess whether there are different avenues to explore in this field.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in August 2022. PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE(R) all, Ovid All EBM Reviews, Ovid Embase and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. In Vivo animal and human studies concerning the biological augmentation of meniscal lesions by factors other than PRP, MSCs or fibrin clots were included. Cartilage-only studies, previous systematic reviews and expert opinions were excluded. All data were analyzed by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Of 8965 studies only nineteen studies covering 12 different factors met the inclusion criteria. Eight studies investigated the use of growth factors for meniscal biologic augmentation, such as vascular endothelial growth factor or bone morphogenic protein 7. Five studies reported on cell therapy and six studies focused on other factors such as hyaluronic acid, simvastatin or atelocollagen. Most studies (n = 18) were performed on animal models with gross observation and histological evaluation as outcomes. Polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry were also common. Biomechanical testing was the object of only two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although several augmentation strategies have been attempted, none has yielded conclusive results, testifying to a lack of understanding with regard to meniscal healing. More research is needed to better understand the pathways that regulate meniscus repair and how to act positively on them.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of case-control and animal laboratory studies.

Good mid- to long-term outcomes after meniscus bucket-handle tear repair: A comparative analysis with and without anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Purpose

To evaluate mid- to long-term clinical outcomes after arthroscopic bucket-handle meniscal tear (BHMT) repair and to assess the impact of concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

Methods

A comparative retrospective case series with blinded outcome assessment was conducted. All consecutive patients treated with arthroscopic BHMT repair with or without concurrent ACLR between 2001 and 2021 were eligible for inclusion. Fifty-five patients with an average follow-up of 7.3 ± 3.4 years were included in the analysis. Outcome measures comprised post-operative IKDC Subjective Knee Form, Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale, KOOS, and visual analogue scale (VAS) for satisfaction. Additionally, failure and reoperation rates were assessed.

Results

The failure rate was 9%. Medial BHMT repair showed superior post-operative IKDC scores compared to lateral meniscus repair (p = 0.038). Concurrent ACLR did not demonstrate any impact on post-operative KOOS, IKDC, Tegner or patient satisfaction. The mean IKDC score at final follow-up across both groups was 80.4 ± 17.8. The mean Lysholm score was 86.9 ± 16.7. Mean KOOS scores were (i) symptoms: 83.6 ± 18.3, (ii) pain: 90.2 ± 14.4, (iii) activities of daily living: 93.6 ± 15.1, (iv) sports: 78.3 ± 26.0 and (v) quality of life: 70.5 ± 24.5. Mean patient satisfaction (VAS) was 7.9 ± 2.5. The mean Tegner score was 4.9 ± 1.9. A consistent positive correlation between the number of sutures used and post-operative outcome measures was observed but did not reach statistical significance for most items.

Conclusion

Arthroscopic BHMT repair achieved good clinical outcomes and an acceptable failure rate of 9% at a mean follow-up of 7 years, supporting the clinical value of meniscal repair, including large BHMTs. Concurrent ACLR showed no impact on clinical outcomes.

Level of Evidence

Level IV (retrospective case series).

Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy on stable knees are better for traumatic tears when compared to degenerative lesions: A systematic review

PURPOSE

An arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) for degenerative meniscus lesions and traumatic meniscus tears are two distinct entities and their long-term outcomes are rarely reported. The aim of this review was to compare the long-term (clinical and radiological) results of APM performed on stable knees for traumatic tears (TT) or degenerative lesions (DL).

METHODS

Pubmed, Scopus and Embase databases were searched to identify relevant studies published between 2010 and 2023 using the keywords 'meniscectomy' OR 'meniscectomies' OR 'meniscal resection'. English-language, Levels I-IV evidence studies reporting either radiographic or clinical outcome measures with a minimum of 6 years' follow-up after APM were included. Studies including discoid meniscus, open meniscectomy, unstable knee and combination with other procedures were excluded. To rate the quality of evidence, the methodological index for non-randomized studies was used.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included, with follow-up periods ranging from 6 to 22 years. Eleven studies dealt with TT with a mean age of 31.5 ± 6.6 years and a mean follow-up of 11.6 ± 6.9 years. At the last follow-up, radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) ranged from 36% to 76%, with an average rate of 48 ± 19%; functional scores ranged from 71 to 97, with a mean of 90 ± 4 for the Lysholm score, 86 ± 10 for the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and 94 ± 16 for the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome (KOOS). Twenty-one studies dealt with DL with a mean age of 49.9 ± 7.2 years and a mean follow-up of 14.9 ± 6.3 years. At the last follow-up, radiographic OA ranged from 23% to 97%, with an average rate of 77 ± 28%; functional scores ranged from 40 to 87, with a mean of 79 ± 10 for the Lysholm score and 71 ± 16 for the IKDC.

CONCLUSION

Ten-year clinical outcomes of APM are better for TTs when compared to DLs. Rates of OA are difficult to compare but lower for TTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Meniscal Repair With Iliotibial Band Grafting and Collagen Membrane Wrapping Augmentation

This work contains a description of the modified Henning operation. This technique can be proven especially useful in difficult cases of damaged meniscus (complex injuries). It consists of three stages: stable suturing of the meniscus, placement of the graft from the iliotibial band on the meniscus, and covering the graft with a collagen membrane. Stitching the meniscus provides initial stabilization, the graft from the iliotibial band provides scaffolding for the reconstructed tissue, and the collagen membrane provides biological stimulation for healing.

Evaluation of Porous (Poly(lactide-co-glycolide)-co-(ε-caprolactone)) Polyurethane for Use in Orthopedic Scaffolds

To develop an orthopedic scaffold that could overcome the limitations of implants used in clinics, we designed poly(ester-urethane) foams and compared their properties with those of a commercial gold standard. A degradable poly(ester-urethane) was synthetized by polyaddition between a diisocyanate poly(ε-caprolactone) prepolymer (PCL di-NCO, Mn = 2400 g·mol-1) and poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) diol (PLGA, Mn = 2200 g·mol-1) acting as a chain extender. The resulting high-molecular-weight poly(ester-urethane) (PEU, Mn = 87,000 g·mol-1) was obtained and thoroughly characterized by NMR, FTIR and SEC-MALS. The porous scaffolds were then processed using the solvent casting (SC)/particle leaching (PL) method with different NaCl crystal concentrations. The morphology, pore size and porosity of the foams were evaluated using SEM, showing interconnected pores with a uniform size of around 150 µm. The mechanical properties of the scaffolds are close to those of the human meniscus (Ey = 0.5~1 MPa). Their degradation under accelerated conditions confirms that incorporating PLGA into the scaffolds greatly accelerates their degradation rate compared to the gold-standard implant. Finally, a cytotoxicity study confirmed the absence of the cytotoxicity of the PEU, with a 90% viability of the L929 cells. These results suggest that degradable porous PLGA/PCL poly(ester-urethane) has potential in the development of meniscal implants.

Tough gel adhesive is an effective method for meniscal repair in a bovine cadaveric study

PURPOSE

To test tough gel adhesives to repair meniscus tears under relevant loading conditions and determine if they have adequate biomechanical properties to repair meniscus tears in a bovine cadaveric study.

METHODS

Cyclic compression tests on 24 dissected bovine knees were performed. The tough gel adhesive was used either as an adhesive patch or as a coating bonded onto commercially available surgical sutures. Forty-eight menisci were tested in this study; 24 complete radial tears and 24 bucket-handle tears. After preconditioning, the specimens underwent 100 cycles of compression, (800 N/0.5 Hz) on an Instron© machine and the size of the gaps measured. One third of the menisci were repaired with pristine sutures, one third with adhesive patches, and one third with sutures coated in adhesive gel. The size of the gaps was compared after 100 and 500 cycles of compression.

RESULTS

The mean gap measured at the tear site without treatment was 6.46 mm (± 1.41 mm) for radial tears and 1.92 mm (± 0.65 mm) for bucket-handle tears. After treatment and 500 cycles of compression, the mean gap was 1.63 mm (± 1.41 mm) for pristine sutures, 1.50 mm (± 1.16 mm) for adhesive sutures and 2.06 mm (± 1.53 mm) for adhesive gel patches. There was no significant difference between treatments regardless of the type of tear. Also, the gaps for radial tears increased significantly with the number of compression cycles applied (p > 0.001).

CONCLUSION

From a biomechanical standpoint, the tough adhesive gel patch is as effective as suturing. In addition, it would allow the repair of non-suturable tears and thus broaden the indications for meniscus repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Controlled laboratory study.

Biomechanical Comparison of the Simple Suture Technique, Meniscal Matrix-Assisted Repair, and a Novel Meniscus Cap Suture Technique for Complex Meniscal Repair

Background

Meniscal repair is the gold standard for simple morphology tears. However, when the morphology and chronicity of the tear are less favorable, the success of the standard techniques is reduced.

Purpose/Hypothesis

To compare meniscal repair augmented by a new bioresorbable implant (Meniscus Cap) versus a traditional simple suture technique and the currently available augmented repair collagen matrix meniscus wrapping technique. It was hypothesized that the Meniscus Cap suture technique would increase ultimate failure load and less displacement during cyclic loading.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 80 fresh porcine menisci were harvested. Complex tears were created in 60 menisci, and 20 intact menisci were tested as the control group. Repairs were performed on the 60 meniscal tears using 1 of the 3 techniques (20 menisci each): an inside-out H-suture group (SS), the collagen matrix wrapping technique (CMW), and the Meniscus Cap bioresorbable implant group (CM). The menisci were subjected to 500 loading cycles from 4 to 20 N at a frequency of 1 Hz, and the total displacement was recorded. Then, the specimens underwent load to failure testing at a rate of 3.15 mm/s, and the failure mode was noted.

Results

After 500 cycles of cyclic loading, there were no significant differences in displacement between the controls and CM group (0.524 vs 0.448 mm; P = .95). The displacement after the CM was significantly smaller compared with the CMW and the SS (0.448 vs 1.077 mm [P = .0009] and 0.448 vs 0.848 mm [P = .04], respectively). The ultimate load to failure was significantly greater for the controls and the CM group compared with the SS and CMW groups (controls, 1278.7 N and CM, 628.5 N vs CMW, 380.1 N and SS, 345.1 N; P < .05). The failure mode was suture breakage (suture failure) for all repairs.

Conclusion

In a porcine specimen meniscal repair model, the biomechanical properties of a novel Meniscus Cap repair technique were superior to that of the simple suture and CMW techniques.

Clinical Relevance

The results suggest that the Meniscal Cap repair technique may provide sufficient primary stability of the meniscal fixation even in the cases of complex meniscal tears.

Meniscectomy is associated with a higher rate of osteoarthritis compared to meniscal repair following acute tears: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Meniscal tears are common and may impair knee function and biomechanics. This meta-analysis compared meniscal repair versus resection in patients with symptomatic meniscal tears in terms of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), joint width, surgical failure, and rate of progression to osteoarthritis (OA) at conventional radiography.

METHODS

This study was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In August 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. Two reviewers independently performed the analysis and a methodological quality assessment of the included studies. All the clinical investigations which compared repair versus resection of meniscal tears were accessed.

RESULTS

Data from 20 studies (31,783 patients) were collected. The mean BMI was 28.28 ± 3.2 kg/m2, and the mean age was 37.6 ± 14.0 years. The mean time elapsed from injury to surgery was 12.1 ± 10.2 months and the mean medial joint width was 4.9 ± 0.8 mm. Between studies comparability at baseline was found in age, women, BMI, time from injury to surgery and length of the follow-up, PROMs, medial joint width, and stage of OA. The resection group demonstrated a greater Lysholm score (P = 0.02). No difference was found in the International Knee Documentation Committee (P = 0.2). Nine studies reported data on the rate of failures at a mean of 63.00 ± 24.7 months. No difference was found between the two groups in terms of persistent meniscal symptoms (P = 0.8). Six studies reported data on the rate of progression to total knee arthroplasty at a mean of 48.0 ± 14.7 months follow-up. The repair group evidenced a lower rate of progression to knee arthroplasty (P = 0.0001). Six studies reported data on the rate of advanced knee OA at a mean of 48.0 ± 14.7 months of follow-up. The repair group evidenced a lower rate of advanced knee OA (P = 0.0001). No difference was found in the mean joint space width (P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

Meniscal repair is associated with a lower progression to knee osteoarthritis at approximately six years of follow-up compared to partial meniscectomy. No difference in PROMs, medial joint width, and failures were evidenced.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, meta-analysis.