The German Arthroscopy Registry DART: what has happened after 5 years?

Females show worse functional outcome and quality of life compared to males 2 years after meniscus surgery: Data analysis from the German Arthroscopy Registry

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of sex on knee function, activity and quality of life following meniscus surgery using data from the German Arthroscopy Registry.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study with data collected between 2017 and 2022. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), namely Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ Scale), and Marx Activity Rating Scale (MARS), were collected preoperatively and at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Data were analysed to examine differences between male and female patients regarding PROMs, pre-existing conditions, meniscus lesion types and surgical treatments.

RESULTS

A total of 1106 female (36.6%) and 1945 male patients (63.7%) were included. Males were significantly younger than females and had a higher body mass index. Overall, there were four times more medial meniscus lesions (MMLs) (77.5%) than lateral meniscus lesions (LMLs) (27.9%). Degenerative LMLs were more frequent in females, while traumatic LMLs were more common in males. Frequencies of traumatic and degenerative MMLs were similar among males and females. Males had higher absolute KOOS irrespective of treatment or meniscus lesion type. Meniscus repair resulted in similar improvements in ΔKOOS for both sexes, while meniscus resection exhibited higher absolute KOOS for males at each time point. Males generally had higher EQ Scale and MARS than females.

CONCLUSION

Greater improvements in knee function, activity and quality of life were observed in males. While MMLs appear to be comparable among sexes, the nature of LML differed significantly. These results may help surgeons to refine patient selection for specific treatments to improve overall clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Comparison of needle and conventional arthroscopy for visualisation of predefined anatomical structures of the knee joint: a feasibility study in human cadavers and patients

BACKGROUND

In terms of the optics used for Knee arthroscopy, a large number of different endoscopes are currently available. However, the use of the 30° optics in knee arthroscopy has been established as the standard procedure for many years. As early as the 1990s, needle arthroscopy was occasionally used as a diagnostic tool. In addition to the development of conventional optics technology in terms of camera and resolution, needle arthroscopes are now available with chip-on-tip image sensor technology. To date, no study has compared the performance of this kind of needle arthroscopy versus standard arthroscopy in the clinical setting in terms of the visibility of anatomical landmarks. In this monocentric prospective feasibility study, our aim was to evaluate predefined anatomical landmarks of the knee joint using needle arthroscopy (0° optics) and conventional knee arthroscopy (30° optics) and compare their performance during knee surgery.

METHODS

Examinations were performed on eight cadavers and seven patients who required elective knee arthroscopy. Two surgeons independently performed the examinations on these 15 knee joints, so that we were able to compare a total of 30 examinations. The focus was on the anatomical landmarks that could be visualized during a conventional diagnostic knee arthroscopy procedure. The quality of visibility was evaluated using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

In summary, the average visibility for all the anatomic landmarks was rated 4.98/ 5 for the arthroscopy using 30° optics. For needle arthroscopy, an average score of 4.89/ 5 was obtained. Comparatively, the needle arthroscope showed slightly limited visibility of the retropatellar gliding surface in eight (4.5/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), medial rim of the patella in four (4.85/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), and suprapatellar recess in four (4.83/ 5 vs. 5/ 5) cases. Needle arthroscopy was slightly better at visualizing the posterior horn of the medial meniscus in four knee joints (4.9/ 5 vs. 4.85/ 5).

CONCLUSION

Needle arthroscopy is a promising technology with advantages in terms of minimally invasive access and good visibility of anatomical landmarks. However, it also highlights some limitations, particularly in cases with challenging anatomy or the need for a wide field of view.