FasT-Fix meniscal repair: mid-term results

Association Between MRI Signal Intensity of the Repaired Lateral Meniscus and Residual Anterolateral Knee Laxity After ACL Reconstruction

Background

Anterolateral knee laxity (ALLx) has been linked to tears of the lateral meniscus (LM) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.

Purpose

To investigate the longitudinal relationship between the signal intensity (SI) of the repaired LM on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and residual ALLx after ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Included were 87 patients who underwent double-bundle ACLR and lateral meniscal repair (mean age, 23.5 years; body mass index, 23.7 kg/m2; 56 women) at a single institution between 2010 and 2019. Proton density-weighted (PDW) and T2-weighted (T2W) MRI was performed at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and the SI ratio (SIR) was calculated as (SI of the repaired LM)/(SI of the posterior cruciate ligament). At the 12-month follow-up, ALLx was evaluated using the pivot-shift test; an International Knee Documentation Committee grade ≥1 indicated residual ALLx.

Results

Overall, 12 patients (13.8%) exhibited ALLx at 12 months postoperatively. At 3 months postoperatively, the SIR on PDW images (SIR-PDW) was significantly higher in patients with ALLx versus those without ALLx (1.98 ± 0.77 vs 1.49 ± 0.52, respectively; P = .007); there was no difference in the SIR on T2W images between the groups. SIR-PDW at 3 months postoperatively was correlated negatively with patient age (r = -0.308, P = .004). When patients were stratified into a younger (≤22 years; n = 53; ALLx = 7 [13.2%]) and an older (>22 years; n = 34; ALLx = 5 [14.7%]) group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for SIR-PDW in the younger group were statistically significant for predicting the prevalence of ALLx at all follow-up times (AUCs, 0.733-0.788) with optimal cutoff values of 2.00 at 3 months, 1.50 at 6 months, and 1.50 at 12 months. Logistic regression analysis revealed that if younger patients consistently had higher SIR-PDW values than the cutoff values, they were more likely to have residual ALLx (odds ratios, 10.24-23.57).

Conclusion

For younger patients who underwent both ACLR and lateral meniscal repair, higher MRI SI of the repaired LM was associated with a higher prevalence of residual ALLx.

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

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

All-Inside and Inside-Out Repair Techniques for Bucket-Handle Meniscus Tears Both Result in Improved Patient Outcomes and a Broad Range of Failure Rates: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare patient-reported outcomes, failure rates, risk factors for failure, and complications in patients with bucket-handle meniscus tears (BHMTs) undergoing repair with inside-out (IO) versus all-inside (AI) techniques.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases from database inception to August 2023 according to the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The inclusion criteria consisted of Level I to IV clinical studies published in the past 10 years with greater than 2 years of follow-up that evaluated patient-reported outcome scores and/or the incidence of failure after IO or AI repairs for BHMTs. Clinical studies not reporting outcomes or failure rates, older studies using outdated implants, animal studies, reviews, letters to the editor, case reports, cadaveric studies, and articles not written in the English language or with English-language translation were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. Outcomes were reported as ranges and qualitatively compared.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies published from 2013 to 2023, consisting of 1,062 patients with BHMTs, were identified. Thirteen studies (14 cohorts, 649 patients) reported on AI repair (mean age range, 23.7-32 years) and 7 studies (7 cohorts, 413 patients) reported on IO repair (mean age range, 16.7-34.6 years). Both groups had improved postoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores. Decreased range of motion was the most commonly reported complication in the AI group (range, 2.6%-4%), whereas adhesions for arthrofibrosis were the most commonly reported complication in the IO group (n = 12; range, 6%-7.9%). The overall reported failure rate ranged from 6.9% to 20.5% within the AI group and from 0% to 20% within the IO group.

CONCLUSIONS

AI and IO repair techniques for BHMTs both result in improved Lysholm and Tegner scores. However, broad ranges of failure are reported in the literature, with overall failure rates ranging from 6.9% to 20.5% after AI repair and from 0% to 20% after IO repair. Younger age and isolated medial BHMT repair are the most frequently reported risk factors for the AI technique, whereas postoperative stiffness is the most frequently reported complication after both repair techniques.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Rehabilitation protocol after suturing the medial meniscus of a stable knee, a retrospective series of the Francophone Arthroscopy Society

INTRODUCTION

Surgical meniscal lesions are common and 80% of cases involve the medial meniscus of a stable knee. There is a lack of consensus regarding postoperative rehabilitation protocols and a wide variation between restrictive and accelerated rehabilitation protocols exists. The main objective of this study was to report the functional results and the failure rate of the various rehabilitation protocols of the retrospective series of the French Society of Arthroscopy (SFA) after suturing the medial meniscus of a stable knee, considering whether the tear is stable or unstable.

HYPOTHESIS

Our hypothesis was that accelerated rehabilitation was not associated with an increased risk of failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study was conducted across 10 centers (6 private hospitals and 4 public hospitals) including all patients tested for a medial meniscus suture in a stable knee between January 1, 2005 and November 31, 2017 for a minimum follow-up of 5years. Demographic, imaging, suturing, rehabilitation protocol, and functional TEGNER and KOOS scores were collected. Failure was defined as performing a secondary meniscectomy.

RESULTS

Three hundred and sixty-seven patients were analyzed with an average follow-up of 82months. Immediate weight bearing was allowed in 85% of cases, the wearing of a brace was present in almost 74% of cases and flexion was limited in 97% of cases. Inter-group comparisons found a higher suture failure rate in the group with immediate weight bearing (35.6% vs. 20%, p=0.011) and in the group with a brace (36.9% vs. 22.4%, p<0.001). There was no difference in the 90° flexion group. The TEGNER score was higher in the non-weight bearing group (6.5 vs. 5.4, p=0.028) and the KOOS QOL score was higher in the group without a brace (82.2 vs. 66.8, p=0.025). According to a multivariate analysis, immediate weight bearing (OR=3.6, [1.62; 7.98], p=0.0016) and wearing a brace (OR=2.83, [1.54; 5.02], p<0.001) were associated with a higher failure rate. In the group of stable lesions, the use of a brace (OR=3.73, [1.62; 8.56], p=0.0019) was associated with a higher failure rate.

CONCLUSION

No consensus regarding rehabilitation protocols has been established to date and the results of this retrospective series of the SFA affirm the great variability of practices at a national level. Although accelerated rehabilitation protocols are presently favored, the resumption of immediate full weight bearing should be considered with caution, being associated with a higher risk of failure in this series. Deferring weight bearing for 1 month can be considered in the event of a large tear or in the event of damage to the circumferential fibers. Wearing a brace does not seem to have any influence, while limited flexion achieved a consensus.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Concomitant Lateral Meniscus Tear is Associated with Residual Rotatory Knee Instability 1 Year after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Case-cohort Study

Lateral meniscus tear (LMT) accompanied by anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries has been reported to provoke rotatory instability of the affected knee joint. Unfortunately, these previous papers did not determine whether LMT-derived rotatory knee instability is residual because only preoperative or time zero data exists. This study aimed to longitudinally investigate how the prevalence of comorbid LMT is associated with residual rotatory knee instability (RKI) 1 year after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). A total of 327 patients who underwent double-bundle ACLR (average age: 23.4 years, body mass index: 23.5 kg/m2, 215 females). The patients were divided into three groups based on arthroscopy: 1) intact lateral meniscus (LM); 2) unrepaired LMT; 3) repaired LMT. At the 1-year follow-up, the pivot-shift test was performed. The prevalence of RKI, determined according to IKDC grades (grade ≥1 denoted RKI), was compared with chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Thirty-eight patients (11.6%) had RKI; 203 subjects (62.1%) showed LMT, and 124 patients were diagnosed with an intact LM. Out of the 203 patients, 79 (38.9%) underwent LM repair. RKI was more prevalent in the LMT group than in the intact group (13.8% versus 8.1%, p = 0.117; Odds ratio: 1.499 [95%CI: 0.864 - 2.600]). In addition, the prevalence of RKI was significantly higher in the LM-repair group than in the intact-LM group (17.7% versus 8.1%, p = 0.038; Odds Ratio: 2.455 [95%CI: 1.032 - 5.842]). Medial meniscus tear (MMT) was detected in 113 patients (34.6%); RKI prevalence was not statistically different between the intact-MM group and the MMT group (12.2% versus 10.6%, p = 0.681). The current cohort study clarified that LMT comorbid with ACL injury was longitudinally associated with increased RKI prevalence 1 year after ACLR. Therefore, patients who underwent both ACLR and LM repair demonstrated a significantly higher prevalence of residual RKI.

Is the popliteal tendon sufficient for all-inside suture in lateral meniscus repair? A 22-case cadaver study

INTRODUCTION

Arthroscopic lateral meniscus repair is performed in the "figure-of-4 position" (supine, with the affected knee flexed and the lower leg crossed over the extended contralateral leg), and anchorage is often on the popliteal tendon. Extending the limb at the end of the procedure alters the relations between the popliteal tendon and the repaired meniscus. The present study aimed to assess lateral meniscal suture fixation on the popliteal tendon after a cycle of flexion-extension.

HYPOTHESIS

Extending the knee can induce suture release.

TYPE OF STUDY

Cadaver study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-two fresh adult human cadaver knee specimens were used. Under arthroscopy with all-inside implants, a vertical suture onto the popliteal tendon was performed through the lateral meniscus. Suture status was assessed under arthroscopy after a cycle of flexion-extension, and deemed defective if the suture was sufficiently loose for the arthroscope to be able to be passed through the popliteal hiatus, if the stitch had passed through the meniscus, or if the suture was broken.

RESULTS

Thirteen sutures (59.1%) remained well fixed, and 9 (40.1%) were defective: 4 (18.2%) were loose, in 4 (18.2%) the stitch had passed through the meniscus, and in 1 (4.5%) the suture had broken.

CONCLUSION

In a population of elderly cadaver knee specimens, arthroscopic suture of the lateral meniscus to the popliteal tendon was defective after flexion-extension in 40% of cases. Stress seems to be exerted on the suture when extension is resumed. Thus, a single stitch seems insufficient for stable lateral meniscus repair.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Suture of the lateral meniscus to the popliteal tendon undergoes stress when extension is resumed, potentially causing failure of lateral meniscus repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Arthroscopic Meniscal Repair: University Hospital Southampton Experience

Introduction The meniscus plays an integral role in the proper functioning of the knee joint. Located between the articular surfaces of the tibia and femur, the meniscus functions to provide stability to the knee joint, even out axial load, absorb shock, and provide some lubrication to the knee joint. Accordingly, treatment of meniscal injuries aims to preserve as much meniscal tissue as possible to avoid the myriad complications that arise from its removal. This study of the all-inside technique for meniscal repair evaluates the University Hospital Southampton experience by comparing our outcomes with the available literature. Patients and methods This is a retrospective study from January 2016 to December 2020. Records of patients were obtained through the preoperative assessment clinics network and electronic notes. The endpoints of the study were defined as patients who either were discharged, experienced failure of repair, i.e., symptomatic or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) changes, or were offered re-surgery. Results Eighty-one patients, comprising 51 males and 30 females, were included in the study, and 85 repairs were performed. A steady increase in the number of procedures was observed year on year until the outbreak of COVID-19. The mean age of patients was 24.7 years, with a range of 39 years. The medial meniscus was found to be injured more often than the lateral meniscus. The most commonly observed injury pattern was the bucket handle (BH) type. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury was found to be associated with meniscal injuries in around half of patients. The reason for this occurrence can be attributed to the ligamentous connection between the medial meniscus and the anterior cruciate ligament in the phenomenon described in the "unhappy triad." On average, three FasT-Fix sutures were required per procedure. Discussion and conclusion After a follow-up of 11 months, 11 (13.6%) treated patients were noted to have failed repair, as defined by the endpoint criteria. Age and acuity were noted to not affect outcomes, and the results suggest that males are at higher risk of failed repair than females (p<0.05).

Does Accelerated Rehabilitation Provide Better Outcomes Than Restricted Rehabilitation in Postarthroscopic Repair of Meniscal Injury?

CONTEXT

Meniscal injury is a common pathology, and the postoperative rehabilitation program is essential to patients after surgery. However, the optimal rehabilitation plan after meniscus suture is still controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes between accelerated rehabilitation and restricted programs in patients with meniscus suture (with or without anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, ACLR).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Four databases, including PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, were searched up to November 2021. This study only included studies comparing the clinical outcomes between accelerated (immediate range of motion and weight-bearing) and restricted rehabilitation (immobilization and progressive weight-bearing) for meniscus suture. All selected studies were divided into 2 subgroups: isolated meniscus suture or combined with ACLR. The Lysholm score, Tegner score, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score were evaluated in simple meniscus sutures no less than 1 year. Failure rate was evaluated in both groups, and the tunnel enlargement was additionally evaluated in patients who underwent ACLR.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies with 612 patients were eligible for analysis. The accelerated group included 4 studies with 330 participants, while the restricted group included 7 studies with 282 participants. For the patients after isolated meniscus suture, the accelerated group achieved higher Lysholm scores (mean difference = -4.66; 95% confidence interval, -8.6 to -0.73; P = .02; I2 = 88%) than the restricted group. For the patients after meniscus suture with ACLR, patients undergoing accelerated rehabilitation were associated with a significantly larger tibial tunnel enlargement in the anterior-posterior view (mean difference = -7.08; 95% confidence interval, -10.92 to -3.24; P = .0003; I2 = 0%) and lateral view (mean difference = -10.33; 95% confidence interval, -16.9 to -3.75; P = .002; I2 = 17%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of postoperative rehabilitation in either accelerated or restricted programs in patients with meniscus lesions after repair. A significant higher mean self-reported function was discovered at final follow-ups in the accelerated group. However, a significant increase in tibial tunnel enlargement was also found in accelerated group.

Rehabilitation and return to sports after isolated meniscal repairs: a new evidence-based protocol

PURPOSE

Despite many protocols that have been proposed, there's no consensus in the literature regarding the optimal rehabilitation program and return to sports (RTS) protocol following isolated meniscal repair. The aim of this current concept review is to look at the evidence of rehabilitation and RTS program after isolated meniscal repair, focusing on general and specific protocols per type of injury trying to give some guidelines based on the current state of knowledge.

METHODS

A narrative literature review was performed searching PubMed database to identify relevant articles from January 1985 to October 2021 on rehabilitation and RTS after isolated meniscal repair. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case series, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cadaveric studies and basic science studies were included.

RESULTS

When the hoop tensile stress effect is preserved, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be suggested. Hence, partial weight bearing (20 kg) in association with ROM limited to 90° is allowed for the first four weeks, followed by weight bearing as tolerated. In contrast, when circumferential hoop fibers are disrupted, a restricted rehabilitation protocol may be recommended. In this scenario no weight bearing is allowed for the first six weeks after the surgery and range of motion (ROM) is limited to 90°.

CONCLUSION

Biomechanical evidence suggests that tailoring an individualized protocol based upon the type of lesion and meniscus stability is reasonable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

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.

Return-to-Sport Rate and Activity Level Are High Following Arthroscopic All-Inside Meniscal Repair With and Without Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature of return-to-sport outcomes following all-inside meniscus repair and evaluate whether concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) influenced these outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of the MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Registry of Systematic Reviews databases was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Two reviewers examined all literature pertaining to sport outcomes following all-inside meniscal repair. Studies were included if they had a 12-month minimum follow-up and reported return to sport rate, Tegner, or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Sport outcomes. Studies with meniscal repair techniques other than the all-inside technique were excluded. Studies were not excluded if they contained patients receiving concomitant ACLR. Study quality was evaluated with the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies comprising 872 patients were included in this investigation. The weighted average patient age was 28.7 (range 14.1-42.1) years, and the weighted average follow-up was 56.0 (range 18.0-155.0) months. The mean Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies score was 14.4 ± 3.7. Ten investigations reported both preoperative (range 2.3-3.5) and postoperative (range 4.0-7.3) Tegner outcomes, with scores at final follow-up greater in each of the 10 reporting investigations. KOOS Sport outcomes were examined in 5 investigations, with scores at follow-up ranging from 63.6 to 91. Three studies reported a return to sport rate ranging from 89.6 to 90% at follow-up. Four investigations compared sport-related outcomes between isolated meniscal repair and meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR. Two such studies reported no difference between the 2 cohorts, 1 favored the isolated cohort, and 1 favored the combined cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found a 90% return-to-sport rate and high postoperative activity level following all-inside meniscal repair, as assessed by KOOS Sport and Tegner activity scales. Further, concurrent ACLR did not significantly affect these outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, systematic review of level I-IV studies.

All-Inside Arthroscopic Repair For Longitudinal Meniscal Tears: Clinical and Functional Results

Meniscal injuries are a common challenge in orthopaedic surgery. Depending on their location and the patient's age and functional needs, they can be treated either conservatively or surgically. A surgical approach can consist of arthroscopic meniscectomy or meniscal suture. The latter is the treatment of choice in case of lesions involving the red-red or red-white areas of the meniscus, especially for young high-demanding patients. We report here our experience with the repair of longitudinal meniscal tears using the all-inside technique with the Fast-Fix™ 360 Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA). We retrospectively evaluated 20 consecutive cases of longitudinal meniscal tears. In 4 cases, concomitant ACL rupture was diagnosed and treated alongside the meniscal repair. All patients underwent periodic clinical evaluations. At the latest check-up, their functional outcomes were rated according to the Tegner-Lysholm Knee and KOOS scoring scales. The mean Tegner-Lysholm Knee score was 84.85 (44-100) and the mean KOOS score was 88.58. No failure or major complications were observed. Furthermore, a negative statistical association was observed between age at surgery and the post-operative Tegner-Lysholm Knee score (coef. = -1.01189 [-1.942073,-0.0817063], p = 0.035). This relation, independent of gender, meniscus involved, eventual associated ACL reconstruction, and chondral injury, suggests that functional outcomes worsen with increasing patient age. Our results suggest that the arthroscopic all-inside suture is both safe and effective in cases of longitudinal meniscal tear, considering the good post-operative functionality and low rates of local complications and surgical failures.

Surgical Treatment of Isolated Meniscal Tears in Competitive Male Wrestlers: Reoperations, Outcomes, and Return to Sport

Background:

Wrestlers are highly active, young athletes prone to meniscal injuries that often require surgery. However, there is a lack of data evaluating the results of meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy in this cohort.

Purpose:

To describe the outcomes (subjective function, return to play, complications, reoperation rates, and progression of osteoarthritis) for treatment (meniscectomy or repair) of meniscal injuries in a cohort of competitive wrestlers.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

All competitive wrestlers (high school, collegiate, or professional leagues) with a history of a meniscal injury and isolated meniscal surgery at a single institution between 2001 and 2017 were retrospectively identified. Failure was defined as a reinjury of the operative meniscus by clinical or advanced imaging examination, reoperation, or any additional surgical treatment of the meniscus after the index procedure. All patients were contacted for determination of reinjury rates, current sport status, and International Knee Documentation Committee and Tegner activity scores.

Results:

Of 85 male wrestlers with isolated meniscal tears, 34% underwent a meniscal repair, and 66% received a partial meniscectomy. Index surgery failed for 9.4% of the cohort. Among wrestlers treated with initial meniscal repair, 21% required a subsequent partial meniscectomy at a mean 2.2 years, and of those treated with partial meniscectomy, 3% underwent a second operation (P < .001). All secondary operations were revision partial meniscectomies occurring at a mean 3.2 years (95% CI, 0.01-6.4 years) after the index procedure. At final follow-up, 89% of patients were able to return to sport, with 65% returning to wrestling competition. There was significant improvement in the Tegner score from a mean 6.5 (95% CI, 5.9-7.2) preoperatively to 8.3 (95% CI 8.0-8.6) postoperatively (P < .001).

Conclusion:

The reoperation rate after meniscal surgery in wrestlers was quite low, but only 65% returned to competitive wrestling. Meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy improved patient-reported outcomes and activity levels at short-term follow-up. However, 21% of wrestlers treated with initial meniscal repair required a subsequent partial meniscectomy at a mean 2.2 years.

Return-to-Play and Rehabilitation Protocols Following Isolated Meniscal Repair-A Systematic Review

Purpose

To systematically review the literature and assess the reported rehabilitation protocols, return-to-play guidelines, and reported rates of return-to-play after meniscal repair.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies on meniscal repair. Studies were included if return-to-play data and/or rehabilitation protocols were reported. The rate and timing of return-to-play was assessed. The rehabilitation protocols were documented, in addition to when to start range of motion (ROM), full ROM, partial weight-bearing (WB), and full WB.

Results

Overall, 88 studies met our inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies, including 507 patients, cited a range of 71.2% to 100% of return-to-play, with 53.9% to 92.6% returning to the same/greater level, ranging between 3.3 and 10 months. There was considerable variability in the reported rehabilitation protocols, but the most frequently reported time to begin ROM exercises was within the first week (78.9%) and full ROM at 6 weeks (33.3%). Partial WB was typically begun during the first week (61.0%), and full WB between the fourth and sixth week (65.6%) postoperatively. Following surgery, time elapsed was the most commonly cited criteria for return-to-play (97.0%), with 6 months being the most common time point applied (46.9%). No study advised against returning to competitive or contact sports after meniscal repair.

Conclusions

In conclusion, there was a high rate of return-to-play following meniscal repair, with 60% of patients returning to the same level of play. However, there was considerable diversity in the reported rehabilitation protocols and insufficient reporting on return-to-play criteria in the literature. This demonstrates the need for further research and formulation of an evidence-based consensus statement for this patient population.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Examining Techniques for Treatment of Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesions During Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the clinical outcomes and adverse events among different techniques for treatment of medial meniscal ramp lesions performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Reviews, Web of Science, and Medline databases were searched for studies examining clinical outcomes after surgical treatment of ramp lesions. Studies were selected if they met the following criteria: (1) evaluation of the outcome of surgical repair of meniscal ramp lesions, (2) injuries associated with ACL tears, (3) minimum 6-month follow up, (4) publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and (5) English language or translation readily available.

RESULTS

Seven studies met inclusion criteria (485 patients; mean age 27.1 years [range 12 to 59]; mean follow-up 26.9 months [range 8 to 40]). Two all-inside techniques (suture-hook and an all-inside meniscus repair device) in addition to abrasion and trephination alone were analyzed. Each technique demonstrated significant increases in postoperative Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, reaching the established minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for each patient reported outcome. Incomplete healing was documented in 12.1% to 12.9% of cases in which the tear was not repaired at the time of ACL reconstruction, 2.3% to 11.7% in cases using the suture-hook for repair, and 10.8% to 15% in the all-inside meniscus repair device group.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrated that several approaches used to treat medial meniscal ramp lesions associated with ACL tears lead to positive clinical outcomes. Small, stable tears <2 cm in size may be managed with debridement alone. For larger, more unstable lesions, an all-inside approach has demonstrated positive clinical outcomes. Prospective trials are needed to determine the best management for meniscal ramp lesions. Additionally, further research is needed to better understand how to minimize the risk of technique-related complications (e.g., improper implant deployment).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level II, III, and IV studies.

Evaluation of Midterm Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Arthroscopically Repaired Vertical Longitudinal and Bucket-Handle Lateral Meniscal Tears

Background:

Lateral meniscal tears in the stable knee are rare. There are few comparative studies evaluating functional and radiological outcomes of vertical longitudinal and bucket-handle lateral meniscal tears.

Purpose:

To evaluate the midterm clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopically repaired traumatic vertical longitudinal and bucket-handle lateral meniscal tears.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A total of 43 full-thickness lateral meniscal repairs, including 22 (51.2%) for vertical longitudinal tears and 21 (48.8%) for bucket-handle tears, were evaluated. A clinical assessment was performed according to the Barrett criteria, and patient outcomes were measured with the Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, and overall satisfaction scale. Magnetic resonance imaging was used as the radiological re-examination method preoperatively and at final follow-up. A subgroup analysis examining isolated repair versus repair with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction was performed.

Results:

The mean follow-up period was 63.2 months (range, 24-86 months). Based on clinical and radiological outcomes, 38 of the 43 repairs (88.3%) were successful, and the remaining 5 (11.6%) cases were considered to be failures. Overall, the combined results for both groups demonstrated an improvement in the Lysholm score, Tegner score, and patient satisfaction. There was no significant difference in the postoperative Lysholm score (91.4 vs 87.0, respectively; P = .223), Tegner score (5.4 vs 5.5, respectively; P = .872), or patient satisfaction (7.2 vs 7.4, respectively; P = .624) between bucket-handle repair and vertical longitudinal repair. The subgroup analysis demonstrated no difference in outcome scores for isolated repair versus repair with concurrent ACL reconstruction. Smoking was identified as a risk factor for repair failure.

Conclusion:

Comparable clinical and radiological outcomes were obtained after vertical longitudinal and bucket-handle lateral meniscal repairs using the all-inside or hybrid suture technique with different suture configurations, regardless of whether ACL reconstruction was performed. Smoking was identified as a risk factor for failure.

Current concepts in the techniques, indications and outcomes of meniscal repairs

Knee arthroscopy for meniscal tears is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures. In recent years, there has been an increasing incidence of meniscal repairs, as there are concerns that meniscectomy predisposes patients to early osteoarthritis. Indications for meniscal repair are increasing and can now be performed in older patients who are active, even if the tear is in the avascular zone. Options for meniscal tear management broadly fall into three categories: non-operative management, meniscal repair or meniscectomy. With limited evidence directly comparing each of these options optimal management strategies can be difficult. Decision making requires thorough assessment of patient factors (e.g. age and comorbidities) and tear characteristics (e.g. location and reducibility). The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to review the management options of meniscal tears and summarize the evidence for meniscal tear repair.

Similar failure rate in immediate post-operative weight bearing versus protected weight bearing following meniscal repair on peripheral, vertical meniscal tears

PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS

Post-operative weight bearing after meniscal repair is a point of debate among physicians. This study sought to evaluate whether patients adhering to an immediate WBAT rehabilitation programme have a higher failure rate compared to those adhering to a more traditional, protected, NWB status following meniscal repair. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference in failure between the two groups.

METHODS

A retrospective review of meniscal repair patients greater than 5 years from surgery was performed for patients receiving meniscal repair treatment. Patients were categorized by post-surgical weight-bearing status, either NWB or WBAT, and then analysed for failure of repair. Failure was defined as re-operation on the torn meniscus. The study controlled for variables including age at surgery, sex, height, weight, and BMI, classification of tear type, acuity of the tear, repair location (medial or lateral), repair location within the meniscus, repair technique, and concomitant procedures.

RESULTS

Re-operations were performed in 61 of 157 patients [38.9%]. There was no difference between weight-bearing groups for failure of meniscus repair (n.s.). The tears were acute vertical tears located in the posterior horn and body. For the 61 patients with re-operation, the average time to re-operation was 2.2 years with 10 [16%] > 5 years from surgery, 17 [28%] 2-5 years from surgery, and 34 [56%] < 2 years from surgery. In isolated meniscal repair patients (n = 62), there was no difference between weight-bearing groups for rate of re-operation (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

Weight bearing as tolerated after meniscal repair for peripheral, vertical tears does not result in a higher failure rate than traditional, non-weight bearing over a five-year follow-up period. The clinical relevance is that, based on these data, it may be appropriate to allow weight bearing as tolerated following meniscal repair of peripheral, vertical tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective cohort study, Level III.

Top orthopedic sports medicine procedures

Orthopedic sports medicine is a subspecialty of Orthopedics that focuses on managing pathological conditions of the musculoskeletal system arising from sports practice. When dealing with athletes, timing is the most difficult issue to face. Typically, athletes aim to return to play as soon as possible and at the pre-injury level. This means that management should be optimized to combine the need for prompt return to sport and to the biologic healing time of the musculo-skeletal. This poses a great challenge to sport medicine surgeons, who need to follow with attention to the latest scientific evidence to offer their patients the best available treatment options. We briefly review the most commonly performed orthopedic sports medicine procedures, outlining the presently available scientific evidence on their indications and outcomes.

Long-term outcome after all inside meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix system

Purpose

Meniscal surgery is one of the most performed orthopaedic procedures. Because of its chondroprotective properties, meniscal repair should be attempted whenever possible. Several techniques are described in literature, e.g. all-inside repair using FasT-Fix System from Smith & Nephew. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome at a minimum of 12 years following meniscal repair using FasT-Fix System.

Materials and Methods

Patients who underwent meniscal repair using FasT-Fix System in the time from 2001 to 2003 were analyzed. We included isolated meniscal tears and combined tears with a concomitant ACL rupture. A median 12-year follow-up was conducted in 2015. Failure was defined as a new surgical procedure to the same meniscus. Moreover, functional outcome was evaluated using the KOOS and tegner activity score (TAS).

Results

At follow-up 27% had undergone further surgery to the repaired meniscus. There was no significant difference between isolated and combined group (p = 0.582). The failure rate was significantly higher in females (female 48% versus male 15%; p = 0.005). Comparing sports there was a significantly higher failure rate within soccer and indoor sports group (p = 0.002).Comparing isolated and combined injury groups there was no difference in the TAS (p > 0.05). Only 1 item of KOOS showed no significant difference: 95.33 versus 94.48 for daily life activities (p > 0.05). The other items showed significant differences.49 out of 51 patients with combined injuries suffered an additional ACL rupture. There was no significant difference regarding the meniscal repair failure rate when comparing the groups of simultaneous and delayed ACL repair (p = 0.521).

Conclusions

At 12 years' follow-up 73% had a successful surgery. KOOS was significantly better within isolated meniscus tears. Both groups showed no difference in the TAS. There were no differences regarding failure rate in the comparison of simultaneous or delayed ACL-reconstruction.

Arthroscopic medial meniscal repair with or without concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A subgroup analysis

BACKGROUND

There are few large-scale, long-term studies comparing medial meniscal repairs with or without concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

A total of 140 patients who underwent arthroscopic medial meniscal repair were divided into two groups: Group A, meniscus repair only and Group B, meniscus repair with concurrent ACL reconstruction. Clinical assessments in- cluded physical examination findings, Lysholm score, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Barret criteria were used for the clinical assessment of healing status. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)was obtained to confirmhealing and failure. Subgroups of participants were compared in terms of suture technique, type of tear, and location of tear. KT-2000 arthrometer testing was used for objective evaluation of anterior-posterior knee movement.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up duration was 61 (34-85) months. Clinical outcomes in both groups were significantly improved compared to baseline (P=0.001 vs. P=0.001); however, there was no significant between-group difference in postoperative Lysholm and IKDC scores (P=0.830). The outcomes of three participants (seven percent) in Group A and 11 (11.3%) in Group B were considered as treatment failures (P=0.55). Red-red zone tears had higher scores. Mean postoperative KT2000 arthrometer values of failed participants in Groups A and B were 4.66mm (range, four to six) and 5.2mm (range, two to seven), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Concurrentmedialmeniscus repair and ACL reconstruction did not have clinical superiority over meniscus repair alone. Repairs in the red-red zone appeared to be associated with better outcomes.

Rehabilitation Protocols After Isolated Meniscal Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Current postoperative rehabilitation protocols after isolated meniscal repair vary widely. No consensus exists with regard to the optimal amount of weightbearing, range of motion, or speed at which the patient progresses through the rehabilitation phases. Confounding factors including concomitant ligamentous or cartilaginous injuries have made studying isolated meniscal tears problematic.

PURPOSE

To systematically review and evaluate the influence of range of motion and weightbearing status during the postoperative rehabilitation period after isolated meniscal repair on clinical efficacy and outcome scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. The selection criteria for inclusion were English-language in vivo clinical studies reporting on isolated meniscal repairs utilizing an arthroscopically assisted technique that outlined the postoperative rehabilitation protocol and included at least a 2-year follow-up. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed, and data concerning patient demographics, tear type, repair technique, postoperative protocol details, clinical failures, and outcome scores were extracted from the eligible studies. Rehabilitation protocols were divided into "accelerated," "motion restricted," "weight restricted," and "dual restricted" according to the limitations placed on the treatment groups.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies, containing 17 different treatment groups, met the inclusion criteria. The 2 accelerated groups, 2 motion-restricted groups, 4 weight-restricted groups, and 9 dual-restricted groups showed similar efficacy in terms of clinical success and postoperative outcome scores. Early range of motion and weightbearing status showed no influence over clinical outcomes. Of the 17 groups, 13 reported a greater than 70% clinical success rate with significant variation in the tear type, fixation technique, and postoperative restrictions.

CONCLUSION

Early range of motion and immediate postoperative weightbearing appear to have no detrimental effect on the chances for clinical success after isolated meniscal repair. Significant variation exists between postoperative protocols, with no current consensus on the ideal parameters for weightbearing and range of motion. Studies reporting outcomes regarding isolated meniscal repair are limited. Future research should include determining the ideal combination of weightbearing and range of motion for specific tear types.

Inside-Out Versus All-Inside Repair of Isolated Meniscal Tears: An Updated Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Meniscal tears are common in the young, active population. In this group of patients, repair is advised when possible. While inside-out repair remains the standard technique, recent advances in all-inside repair devices have led to a growth in their popularity. Previous reviews on the topic have focused on outdated implants of limited clinical relevance.

PURPOSE

To determine the difference in failure rates, functional outcomes, and complications between inside-out and modern all-inside repairs.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria were (1) clinical study reporting on all-inside or inside-out repair, (2) evidence levels 1 to 4, and (3) use of modern all-inside implants for all-inside repairs. Exclusion criteria were (1) use of meniscal arrows or screws and (2) concomitant surgical procedures. Study characteristics, subjects, surgical technique, clinical outcomes, and complications were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 481 studies were screened and assessed for eligibility, which identified 27 studies for review. Studies defined clinical failure as persistent mechanical symptoms, effusion, or joint line tenderness, while anatomic failure was incomplete or no healing on MRI or second-look arthroscopy. There were no significant differences in clinical or anatomic failure rates between inside-out and all-inside repairs (clinical failure: 11% vs 10%, respectively, P = .58; anatomic failure: 13% vs 16%, respectively, P = .63). Mean ± SD Lysholm and Tegner scores for inside-out repair were 88.0 ± 3.5 and 5.3 ± 1.2, while the respective scores for all-inside repair were 90.4 ± 3.7 and 6.3 ± 1.3. Complications occurred at a rate of 5.1% for inside-out repairs and 4.6% for all-inside repairs.

CONCLUSION

The quality of the evidence comparing inside-out and all-inside meniscal repair remains low, with a majority of the literature being evidence level 4 studies. In this review comparing modern all-inside devices with inside-out repair, no differences were seen in failure rates, functional outcome scores, or complication rates.

Combined outside-in and FasT-Fix sutures for the treatment of serious discoid meniscal tears: A midterm follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The treatment of discoid meniscus is debatable. This study aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of combined outside-in and FasT-Fix sutures for the treatment of serious discoid meniscal tears.

METHODS

This study included 32 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic meniscal plasty for serious discoid meniscal tears (full-thickness vertical, longitudinal tears >10mm) between October 2006 and June 2012. A combination of outside-in and FasT-Fix sutures was used to treat serious discoid meniscal tears. Disappearance of clinical symptoms (locked knee, pain, and clicking) and negative results in the McMurray and Apley grind tests were assessed during follow-up (26 to 47months). The Lysholm, IKDC, and Tegner scores were assessed for therapeutic efficacy. Some patients were followed up with MRI.

RESULTS

Symptoms (pain, clicking, and locking) disappeared in all patients. The Lysholm score improved from 39.1±9.2 to 89.6±6.7 at six months, and to 90.1±6.3 at the last follow-up. The same trends were observed for the IKDC score (from 38.0±9.5 to 90±6.3, and to 91.1±6.4) and the Tegner score (from 2.8±0.6 to 5.2±0.6, and to 5.2±0.5). Among all patients, 13 were followed up with MRI. Among these patients, four had an unhealed stitched edge, but they did not complain of any discomfort in the knees.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a combination of outside-in and FasT-Fix sutures for meniscal plasty had good outcomes for serious discoid meniscal tears and can thus be regarded as a good surgical option.

Repair of isolated horizontal meniscal tears with all-inside suture materials using the overlock method: outcome study with a minimum 2-year follow-up

Background

This study aimed to consider the use of a meniscal repair in patients in order to close the horizontal cleavage extending up to the avascular zone. The hypothesis was to examine the clinical and arthroscopic outcomes following meniscal repair of degenerative horizontal cleavage tears with new-generation all-inside suture materials using the overlock method.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 55 patients which had a horizontal pattern, and finally, 27 patients with a horizontal tear only which required no additional intra-articular surgical intervention were included in the study. Arthroscopic meniscal repair was performed using the overlock method. Functional outcomes were evaluated using Lysholm knee scoring scale, Cincinnati scores, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) criteria and Tegner activity scale. Assessment of meniscal healing was evaluated clinically by the presence of meniscal signs. The preoperative and postoperative MRIs were examined.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 29 months (range, 24–38). The mean Lysholm score improved significantly from 59.5 ± 12.4 points preoperatively to 90.0 ± 4.7 points postoperatively (P < 0.0001). The Cincinnati score increased from 14.8 ± 5.3 to 26.9 ± 1.6 (P < 0.0001). The Tegner activity score increased from 3.7 ± 1.4 to 6.4 ± 1.6 (P < 0.0001). The mean IKDC subjective score also improved significantly from 48.5 ± 9.8 preoperatively to 90.4 ± 5.0 postoperatively (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Meniscal repair of degenerative horizontal tears using the overlock method resulted in improved Lysholm and IKDC subjective scores. With careful selection of the patients and the horizontal meniscus tears, the success of the meniscus repairs increases. Repair can be recommended for all horizontal meniscus tears which can be repaired arthroscopically.

Return to play after all-inside meniscal repair in competitive football players: a minimum 5-year follow-up

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to report the mid-to-long-term return to sports after all-inside meniscal repair in competitive football players.

METHODS

All football players undergoing all-inside meniscal repair with a minimum Tegner activity score of 9 and minimum follow-up of 5 years were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if: (a) they had ipsilateral or contralateral: meniscectomy, posterior cruciate ligament tear, multi-ligament knee injuries, osteotomies, or meniscal transplant (b) they had meniscal tears in the anterior horn, and (c) they had bucket-handle tears. All patients included were contacted by phone and asked for current sport status or Tegner score. Preoperative Tegner scores were collected from the medical charts.

RESULTS

All patients (n = 29) were men with a median (range) age of 27 (18-37) years and a follow-up of 6 (5-8) years. All meniscal injuries were complete and longitudinal tears. The median preinjury Tegner activity score was 9 (range 9-10). Two patients required revision arthroscopy (6.7 %) with partial meniscectomy before being able to return to competitive football due to suture failure. Twenty-six patients (89.6 %) returned to the same level of competition after recovering from surgery. At the last follow-up, 13 patients (45 %) were able to continue playing football at any level, and 8 (28 %) of them were able to return to the same pre-injury competitive level. The main reasons for the decreased level of activity (from competitive to recreational) or to give up football were job-related or changes in their personal life situation, but were not related to knee or meniscal disorders. Fourteen patients underwent meniscal repair alone, whereas 15 patients had an associated ACL reconstruction procedure. There were no significant differences in the collected variables between both subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

All-inside meniscal repair allows for excellent results with regard to return-to-play rates in competitive football. However, only half of the patients are still playing football in the mid-to-long-term follow-up, although reasons to give up football are not related to knee or meniscal disorders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case series, Level-IV.

Results with all-inside meniscal suture in pediatrics

INTRODUCTION

Incidence of meniscal lesions is increasing in the pediatric population. Given the harmful impact of meniscectomy, meniscal repair is attempted whenever possible. The present study sought to assess the efficacy of FasT-Fix (Smith and Nephew) all-inside arthroscopic meniscal repair devices in childhood meniscal lesions. The study hypothesis was that functional results would be equivalent to those of other suture techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nineteen patients were assessed following arthroscopic meniscal repair, at a mean 6 years (range: 3-9 years). Mean age was 14.8 years. There was associated ACL tear in 31% of cases. Functional assessment used Lysholm, subjective IKDC, Tegner activity level and KOOS scores. Anatomic assessment of healing used MRI, arthroscopy or CT-arthrography.

RESULTS

At last follow-up, the meniscal survival rate was 89.5% (n=17/19). Functional results were good: Lysholm: 95.7/100; subjective IKDC: 90.7/100; Tegner: 7.64. Imaging found systematic healing.

DISCUSSION

All-inside arthroscopic meniscal suture is increasingly used in adults, and can also be implemented in children or adolescents in pediatrics. FasT-Fix (Smith and Nephew) implants, although not always easy to use, ensure a perfectly functional knee and conserve long-term meniscal chondroprotection with a low risk of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Intralaryngeal thyroarytaenoid lateralisation using the Fast-Fix 360 system: a canine cadaveric study

Introduction

Laryngeal paralysis is a condition in which failure of arytaenoid abduction results in a reduced rima glottidis cross-sectional area. The most commonly performed surgical techniques rely on unilateral abduction of the arytaenoid, requiring a lateral or ventral surgical approach to the larynx.

Aims and objectives

The aim of the study was to investigate a novel minimally invasive intralaryngeal thyroarytaenoid lateralisation technique, using the Fast-Fix 360 meniscal repair system.

Materials and methods

Larynges were harvested from large breed canine cadavers. With the aid of Kirschner wires placed between the centre of the vocal process and the centre of an imaginary line between the cranial thyroid fissure and the cricothyroid articulation, the mean insertion angle was calculated.

Results

The Fast-Fix 360 delivery needle inserted intralaryngeally (n=10), according to a simplified insertion angle (70°), resulted in thyroid penetration (>2.5 mm from margin) in all patients. The Fast-Fix was applied unilaterally at 70° with the first toggle fired on the lateral aspect of the thyroid cartilage and inside the laryngeal cavity on retraction. The suture was tightened. Preprocedural (61.06±9.21 mm2) and postprocedural (138.37±26.12 mm2) rima glottidis cross-sectional area was significantly different (P<0.0001). The mean percentage increase in rima glottidis cross-sectional area was 125.96 per cent (±16.54 per cent).

Conclusion

Intralaryngeal thyroarytaenoid laterlisation using the Fast-Fix 360 meniscal repair system ex vivo increased the rima glottidis cross-sectional area significantly.

Weightbearing Versus Nonweightbearing After Meniscus Repair

CONTEXT

Optimal rehabilitation after meniscal repair remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature on weightbearing status after meniscal repairs and to provide evidence-based recommendations for postoperative rehabilitation.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (January 1, 1993 to July 1, 2014) and Embase (January 1, 1993 to July 1, 2014) were queried with use of the terms meniscus OR/AND repair AND rehabilitation.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were those with levels of evidence 1 through 4, with minimum 2 years follow-up and in an English publication.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

DATA EXTRACTION

Demographics and clinical and radiographic outcomes of meniscus repair at a minimum of 2 years follow-up were extracted.

RESULTS

Successful clinical outcomes ranged from 70% to 94% with conservative rehabilitation. More recent studies using an accelerated rehabilitation protocol with full weightbearing and early range of motion reported 64% to 96% good results.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes after both conservative (restricted weightbearing) protocols and accelerated rehabilitation (immediate weightbearing) yielded similar good to excellent results; however, lack of similar objective criteria and consistency among surgical techniques and existing studies makes direct comparison difficult.

The FasT-Fix Repair Technique for Ramp Lesion of the Medial Meniscus

Introduction

This technical note describes a new arthroscopic technique to repair the peripheral attachment lesion of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus. The operation was performed under arthroscopy using a standard anterior portal.

Surgical Technique

A FasT-Fix needle was inserted obliquely close to the tibial plateau and the first implant was inserted into the joint capsule depending on its bending angle underneath the meniscus. The second implant was inserted through 1/3 periphery of the meniscus into the meniscocapsular area. The pre-tied self-sliding knot was tensioned to achieve secure fixation of the posterior meniscal peripheral attachment at the original attachment point.

Materials and Methods

From August 2011 to February 2014, 23 knees were diagnosed as ramp lesion, underwent meniscal repair using FasT-Fix technique.

Results

All patients were followed up for average 14 months. The Lysholm score improved from preoperative 64.4±4.52 to postoperative 91.2±4.60.

Conclusions

We believe that the FasT-Fix technique via the standard anterior portal can be a more convenient and less traumatic alternative for repair of the peripheral attachment lesion of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus in the anterior cruciate ligament deficient knee.

Meta-analysis on biomechanical properties of meniscus repairs: are devices better than sutures?

PURPOSE

Meniscal repair devices have been extensively tested during the past decades as reported in the literature. Reviewing the different meniscal repair devices and sutures with their respective biomechanical properties.

METHODS

For this meta-analysis, we conducted a systematic online search using PubMed, EMBASE, CCTR, and CINAHL using the search terms Meniscus OR Meniscal AND Biomechanics AND Repair). Load-to-failure (LtF), stiffness, and cyclic outcome measures were extracted independently and in duplicate. The systematic search revealed 841 manuscripts in total. After exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant publications, 41 studies remained for final analysis. The studies were published in English and German from 1995 to 2013. Due to differing cyclic force protocols, cyclic outcomes had to be excluded.

RESULTS

Overall, sutures had a higher LtF [suture: 87.7 ± 0.3 N (weighted mean ± standard error), device: 56.3 ± 0.1 N] and stiffness (suture: 8.9 ± 0.04 N/mm, device: 8.6 ± 0.04 N/mm) than devices, both p < 0.05. In LfT testing, PDS 0 Vertical (145.0 ± 8.1 N), OrthoCord 2-0 (143.6 ± 11.3 N), and Ethibond No 0 Vertical (133.4 ± 7.7 N) were the strongest sutures and Meniscal Viper (140.9 ± 5.1 N), MaxFire Vertical (136.2 ± 11.3 N), and FasT-Fix Vertical (115.2 ± 1.6 N) were the strongest devices. Second-generation devices were significantly stronger and stiffer than first-generation devices (p < 0.001).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Suture repair remains the gold standard with a vertically oriented suture configuration showing superior LtF values compared to a horizontal configuration. Nevertheless, some meniscal repair devices have similar biomechanical properties to suture repairs. Both suture repairs and devices have a place in meniscal restoration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

None, meta-analysis of controlled laboratory studies.

Repair of a radial tear in the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus

BACKGROUND

There have been no studies evaluating the clinical results after repair of a radial tear in the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus (PHLM) using the FasT-Fix system. This study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical outcomes after repair of a radial tear in the PHLM using the FasT-Fix system in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Between September 2008 and August 2011, 15 radial tears in the PHLM identified during 132 consecutive ACL reconstructions were repaired using the FasT-Fix meniscal repair system. We classified the radial tears into three types according to the tear patterns: simple radial tear, complex radial tear, and radial tear involving the popliteal hiatus. Postoperative evaluation was performed using the Lysholm knee score and Tegner activity level. Second-look arthroscopy was performed in all cases.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 24 months. None of the patients had a history of recurrent effusion, joint line tenderness or a positive McMurray test. The meniscal repair was considered to have a 100% clinical success rate. At the final follow-up, the Lysholm knee score and Tegner activity level were significantly improved compared to the preoperative values. On the second-look arthroscopy, repair of radial tears in the PHLM in conjunction with ACL reconstruction using the FasT-Fix device resulted in complete or partial healing in 86.6% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Clinical results after meniscal repair of a radial tear in the PHLM by using the FasT-Fix system were satisfactory.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case series, Level IV.

Suture versus FasT-Fix all-inside meniscus repair at time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare meniscal healing and functional outcomes after all-inside meniscal repair between sutures and meniscal fixation devices.

METHODS

Sixty patients with a tear within the red-red or red-white zones of the posterior horn of the medial or lateral meniscus in conjunction with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear were included in this study. Meniscal repairs were performed with sutures in 35 patients and the FasT-Fix device (Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA) in 25 patients concomitantly with hamstring ACL reconstruction. Postoperative evaluations included Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, Lachman and pivot-shift tests, and KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA) testing. Follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were obtained postoperatively for all patients to evaluate meniscal healing.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 47.2 months. In the suture group, 31 patients (86.1%) were asymptomatic and 4 (13.9%) were symptomatic. In the FasT-Fix group, 20 patients (80%) were asymptomatic and 5 (20%) were symptomatic. Postoperative functional evaluation and knee stability showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. Follow-up MRI showed that 26 menisci (74.3%) were healed, 3 menisci (8.6%) were partially healed, and 6 menisci (17.1%) were not healed in the suture group. In the FasT-Fix group, 15 menisci (64%) were healed, 7 menisci (24%) were partially healed, and 3 menisci (12%) were not healed. Follow-up MRI showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. In the FasT-Fix group, follow-up MRI showed a newly developed cyst posterior to the medial meniscus in 2 patients. A new tear anterior to the previous tear was found in 1 patient. In the suture group, follow-up MRI showed no cysts or new tears.

CONCLUSIONS

All-inside meniscal repairs using either sutures or the FasT-Fix device showed satisfactory results in patients with concomitant hamstring ACL reconstruction. There was no statistically significant difference in meniscal healing evaluated by MRI and functional outcomes between the 2 techniques.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Outcome of All-Inside Second-Generation Meniscal Repair: Minimum Five-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Meniscal repair and preservation are the goal, when possible, of the treatment of meniscal injury. Current research on second-generation all-inside repair systems has been limited to a maximum of three years of follow-up. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid-term clinical success (at more than five years) of meniscal repair performed with a second-generation all-inside repair device, both as an isolated procedure and with a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent meniscal repair with use of the all-inside FAST-FIX Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew Arthroscopy, Andover, Massachusetts) from December 1999 to January 2007. Eighty-three meniscal repairs (in eighty-one patients) were identified, and follow-up data were obtained for seventy-five (90%). Twenty-six (35%) of the meniscal repairs were performed as isolated procedures. Clinical failure was defined as repeat surgical intervention involving resection or revision repair. Clinical outcomes were also assessed with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and the Marx activity score.

RESULTS

The minimum duration of follow-up was five years (average, seven years). Twelve patients (16%) had failure of the meniscal repair, at an average of forty-seven months (range, fifteen to ninety-five months). The data did not offer enough statistical evidence, at alpha = 0.05, to establish a difference in average patient age, patient sex, or number of sutures utilized between successful repairs and failures. There was no difference in the failure rate between isolated repairs (12%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.76% to 23.76%) and those performed with concurrent ACL reconstruction (18%; 95% CI: 7.47% to 29.13%), and the average time to failure was similar between these two groups (48.1 months versus 46.6 months, p = 0.939). Postoperative KOOS and IKDC outcome scores were also similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This report of mid-term follow-up results of primary second-generation all-inside meniscal repair demonstrates its effectiveness both as an isolated procedure and when it is performed with concurrent ACL reconstruction. After a minimum of five years of follow-up, 84% of the patients continued to demonstrate successful repair. Treatment success was further supported by favorable results on patient-based outcome measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Treatment of meniscal tears: An evidence based approach

Treatment options for meniscal tears fall into three broad categories; non-operative, meniscectomy or meniscal repair. Selecting the most appropriate treatment for a given patient involves both patient factors (e.g., age, co-morbidities and compliance) and tear characteristics (e.g., location of tear/age/reducibility of tear). There is evidence suggesting that degenerative tears in older patients without mechanical symptoms can be effectively treated non-operatively with a structured physical therapy programme as a first line. Even if these patients later require meniscectomy they will still achieve similar functional outcomes than if they had initially been treated surgically. Partial meniscectomy is suitable for symptomatic tears not amenable to repair, and can still preserve meniscal function especially when the peripheral meniscal rim is intact. Meniscal repair shows 80% success at 2 years and is more suitable in younger patients with reducible tears that are peripheral (e.g., nearer the capsular attachment) and horizontal or longitudinal in nature. However, careful patient selection and repair technique is required with good compliance to post-operative rehabilitation, which often consists of bracing and non-weight bearing for 4-6 wk.

Clinical outcomes and complications of a collagen meniscus implant: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to summarise and evaluate the clinical outcomes of the collagen meniscus implant (CMI) and its complication and failure rates. These data were then used to evaluate the results of the CMI at different follow-up time periods and investigate possible differences in the behaviour of lateral and medial CMI.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE and Google Scholar databases using various combinations of the following keywords: "collagen meniscus implant" or "collagen meniscal implant". All studies evaluating medial or lateral CMI using the Lysholm score, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Tegner activity scale and subjective or objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores were included in the systematic review.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the systematic review. The pooled number of patients involved in CMI surgery were 396 (90.2 % medial, 9.8 % lateral), with a mean age at surgery of 37.8 years. Concomitant procedures were present in 48.8 % of patients; most of them were anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and microfractures. The Lysholm score and VAS for pain showed an improvement at six months up to ten years. No noticeable differences were present comparing short-term values of Lysholm score between medial and lateral CMI. The Tegner activity level reached its peak at 12 months after surgery and showed a progressive decrease through five and ten years post CMI implantation, however always remaining above the pre-operative level. Only a few knees were rated as "nearly abnormal" or "abnormal" at IKDC grading at all follow-up evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

The CMI could produce good and stable clinical results, particularly regarding knee function and pain, with low rates of complications and reoperations.

Polyurethane scaffold in lateral meniscus segmental defects: clinical outcomes at 24 months follow-up

BACKGROUND

Segmental tissue loss in the lateral meniscus is associated with pain and increased risk of osteoarthritis even when indications have been carefully considered.

HYPOTHESIS

Repairing the defect using a novel biodegradable scaffold will reduce pain and restore the knee function.

METHODS

In this prospective multicenter study, a total of 54 patients (37 males/17 females; mean age: 28 years [16-50]) were enrolled. All patients presented with postmeniscectomy syndrome and segmental lateral meniscus loss, and were treated with a polyurethane biodegradable scaffold (Actifit(®), Orteq) implanted arthroscopically. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), International Knee Documentation Committee Score (IKDC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

RESULTS

VAS decreased from 5.5 at baseline to 3.6 at 6 months, 3.4 at 12 months and 2.9 at 24 months. IKDC improved from 47.0 at baseline to 60.2, 67.0 and 67.0 at 6, 12 and 24 months. All KOOS subscores improved between baseline and 24 months.

DISCUSSION

Clinical results of this study demonstrate clinically and statistically significant improvements of pain and function scores (VAS, IKDC, and all KOOS subscales except sport), at the 6 months follow-up and on all clinical outcomes at the 2-year follow-up. The Actifit(®) scaffold is safe and effective in treating lateral meniscus defects.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

continuous prospective multicenter study.

Clinical healing rates of meniscus repairs of tears in the central-third (red-white) zone

PURPOSE

To determine the clinical healing rate of repairs of meniscus tears that extend into the central one-third region and the factors that affect the outcome.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed was conducted to determine the outcome of meniscus repairs in the red-white (R/W) zone. Inclusion criteria were as follows: English language, clinical trials published from 1996 to 2013, R/W tears analyzed separately from tears in other zones, arthroscopic suture-based repairs, and all evidence levels.

RESULTS

Of 344 articles identified, 23 met the inclusion criteria. There were 1,232 patients who had 1,326 meniscus repairs, of which 767 were in the R/W zone. Concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was performed in 955 patients (78%). The mean age was 25 years, and the mean follow-up was 4 years. Evaluation criteria included clinical examination in 22 studies, follow-up arthroscopy in 15, magnetic resonance imaging in 6, weight-bearing radiographs in 3, and the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score in 1. Overall, 637 (83%) of the repairs were considered clinically healed because no additional surgery was required and no obvious clinical meniscus symptoms were detected. This included 382 of 470 inside-out suture repairs (81%) and 255 of 297 all-inside suture repairs (86%). Twenty-two factors were assessed in 13 studies to determine their influence on the outcome, with varying results. Authors generally found that patient age, chronicity of injury, involved tibiofemoral compartment, gender, and concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction did not adversely affect the results. Insufficient data existed to assess the healing rates according to the type of meniscus tear except for single longitudinal tears. Complications were reported in 3% of the patients in this review. Long-term assessment of a chondroprotective effect of the repairs was conducted in only 2 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

An acceptable midterm clinical healing rate was found for R/W meniscus repairs, supporting this procedure when appropriately indicated. Long-term studies assessing the chondroprotective effect in the involved tibiofemoral compartment using magnetic resonance imaging and radiographs are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Free rehabilitation is safe after isolated meniscus repair: a prospective randomized trial comparing free with restricted rehabilitation regimens

BACKGROUND

The optimal rehabilitation program after meniscus repair has not been established. Numerous regimens have been suggested as beneficial for meniscus healing, but no controlled trials exist in the literature.

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this prospective randomized trial was to investigate outcome with a free or a restricted rehabilitation regimen after isolated meniscus repair. The hypothesis was that free rehabilitation would result in increased failure of meniscus healing.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients were included in this study within 2 to 3 days after meniscus repair. No patients with concomitant ligament reconstruction or cartilage repair surgery were included. Meniscus repair was performed with the all-inside technique; only vertical meniscus lesions close to the capsule were repaired. Patients were randomized to free (n = 32) or restricted (n = 28) rehabilitation. Free rehabilitation consisted of 2 weeks (range of motion [ROM], 0°-90°, no brace) and touch weightbearing, with unrestricted activity and free ROM allowed thereafter. Restricted rehabilitation consisted of 6 weeks of hinged brace use with a gradual increase ROM to 90° and only touch weightbearing during the 6 weeks. Patients were seen for follow-up at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Those patients with joint line pain at the 3-month follow-up underwent MRI scanning to evaluate meniscus healing; a subsequent arthroscopy was performed for final evaluation meniscus healing if the MRI indicated lack of meniscus healing. At follow-up, the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner function score, pain assessment, and patient satisfaction were used to evaluate outcomes.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were lost to follow-up. Repeat arthroscopy in patients with persistent symptoms demonstrated partial healing or lack of healing in 28% and 36% of patients in the free and the restricted rehabilitation groups, respectively (P = .53, nonsignificant). The KOOS and Tegner function scores were similar between groups at all follow-up times, as was patient satisfaction. Patients who underwent subsequent partial meniscectomy because of meniscus repair failure had lower KOOS score and Tegner function score than did patients without repair failure.

CONCLUSION

Free rehabilitation after meniscus repair is safe and does not entail increased failure rates compared with restricted rehabilitation. Subjective and functional outcomes at 1- and 2-year follow-up were not affected by rehabilitation regimen. Clinical outcomes in patients with repair failure who underwent subsequent partial meniscectomy were poorer than in those with healed meniscus repairs. A concern is the 30% overall lack of healing for patients with isolated meniscus lesions repaired with the all-inside technique.

Osteolysis of the tibial plateau after meniscal repair with hybrid suture anchor

Preservation of the meniscus and consideration for repair is important when treating meniscal tears. Many techniques for repair have been described. At present, all-inside, suture anchor-based meniscal repair systems are widely used. Arthroscopic all-inside hybrid meniscal suturing has been shown to have a low complication rate as the suture anchors remain outside the capsule leaving only the suture material inside the joint. Complications such as chondrolysis or arthrolysis have not been reported with these devices until now. The purpose of our study is to highlight the risks of osteochondral damage if these devices persist intra-articularly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

All-inside meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix meniscal repair system: is still needed to avoid weight bearing? A systematic review

The aim of this study was to review the published clinical outcomes of meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix device comparing standard rehabilitation program to an accelerated rehabilitation protocol. A review of the Medline database was performed involving searches for clinical outcomes of all-inside meniscus repair performed with the FasT-Fix device. Eight studies were identified for inclusion. On the basis of the clinical outcomes of these studies, there appears to be no notable difference between an accelerated rehabilitation regimen with full weight bearing allowed as soon as tolerated and a standard postoperative rehabilitation program. Failure rate was 13 % for patients following an accelerated rehabilitation regimen, and 10 % for standard protocol. Accelerated rehabilitation after all-inside meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix device appears to be safe, and the incidence of retears is in line with those reported for standard rehabilitation protocol.

Cyst following meniscal repair

We present a case of meniscal cyst formation 1 year following a successful meniscal repair in a 30-year-old male using a hybrid suture-anchor meniscal repair system. Open excision of the cyst revealed it to be in continuity with the suture-anchor fragments. The patient made an uneventful recovery. Level of evidence V.

Meniscal repair: the newest fixators

The surgical techniques and associated devices for meniscus repair have improved over time, spurred in part by the clear recognition of the benefits of meniscal preservation and in part by the introduction of ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene containing sutures. The desires for more minimally invasive techniques that decrease the risks of neurovascular injury and articular cartilage excoriation have seen 1 device generation after another introduced and improved upon. The current generation of meniscal repair all-inside devices are easier to use, limit the presence of material on the meniscal surface, and are self-adjusting and suture based. Although the speed of meniscus fixation device development places increasingly useful devices in surgeons' hands, clinical evidence of their effectiveness lag behind.

All-inside meniscal repair devices and techniques

Techniques and devices for meniscal repair are evolving, including for all-inside meniscal repair. The first-generation all-inside meniscal repair devices were simplistic in design, but their technical difficulties and risks led to the development of second-generation devices. These devices employed the suture anchor concept for repair and confirmed the safety of use through standard anterior arthroscopic portals. Third-generation devices introduced the idea of rigid, bioabsorbable materials; unfortunately, these demonstrated higher failure and complication rates compared with other repair techniques. They were also limited in their ability to adjust compression and tension across the repair. Now, fourth-generation devices have been developed that are flexible, suture-based, and allow for variable compression and retensioning across the tear. Each device has its own specifications and technical nuances. With a comprehensive understanding of the current devices available, the industry and surgeons may continue in the development of safer, more successful, user-friendly and cost-effective all-inside devices.

Biomechanical testing of suture-based meniscal repair devices containing ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene suture: update 2011

PURPOSE

To evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of recently introduced ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene suture-based, self-adjusting meniscal repair devices.

METHODS

Updating a prior study published in 2009, we made vertical longitudinal cuts 3 mm from the periphery in fresh-frozen adult human menisci to simulate a bucket-handle meniscus tear. Each tear was then repaired by a single repair technique in 10 meniscus specimens. Group 1 menisci were repaired with a vertical mattress suture of No. 2-0 Ethibond (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ). Group 2 menisci were repaired with a vertical mattress suture of No. 2-0 OrthoCord (DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA). Group 3 menisci were repaired with a single OmniSpan device with No. 2-0 OrthoCord suture (DePuy Mitek). Group 4 menisci were repaired with a single Meniscal Cinch device with No. 2-0 FiberWire suture (Arthrex, Naples, FL). Group 5 menisci were repaired with a single MaxFire device inserted with the MarXmen gun (Biomet Sports Medicine, Warsaw, IN). Group 6 menisci were repaired with a Sequent device with No. 0 Hi-Fi suture (ConMed Linvatec, Largo, FL) in a "V" suture configuration. Group 7 menisci were repaired with a single FasT-Fix 360 device (Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA). By use of a mechanical testing machine, all samples were preloaded at 5 N and cycled 200 times between 5 and 50 N. Those specimens that survived were destructively tested at 5 mm/min. Endpoints included maximum load, displacement, stiffness, and failure mode.

RESULTS

Mean failure loads were as follows: Ethibond suture, 73 N; OrthoCord suture, 88 N; OmniSpan, 88 N; Cinch, 71 N; MarXmen/MaxFire, 54 N; Sequent, 66 N; and FasT-Fix 360, 60 N. Ethibond was stronger than MarXmen/MaxFire. The mean displacement after 100 cycles was as follows: Ethibond, 2.58 mm; OrthoCord, 2.75 mm; OmniSpan, 2.51 mm; Cinch, 2.65 mm; MarXmen/MaxFire, 3.67 mm; Sequent, 3.35 mm; and FasT-Fix 360, 1.13 mm. The MarXmen/MaxFire showed greater 100-cycle displacement than Ethibond and FasT-Fix 360. No difference in stiffness existed for these devices, and failure mode varied without specific trends.

CONCLUSIONS

The biomechanical properties of meniscal repairs using the OmniSpan, Cinch, Sequent, and FasT-Fix 360 devices are equivalent to suture repair techniques. However, the MarXmen/MaxFire meniscal repair device showed significantly lower failure loads and survived less cyclic loading in the human cadaveric meniscus than other tested repairs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most commercially available devices for all-inside meniscal repair using ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene suture provide fixation comparable to the classic vertical mattress suture repair technique in human cadaveric meniscus.

Comparison of inside-out and all-inside techniques for the repair of isolated meniscal tears: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic meniscal repair techniques are continuing to evolve. Most studies to date comparing the healing rate of inside-out to all-inside meniscal repair techniques are confounded by associated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or deficiency.

PURPOSE

This review was conducted to compare the effectiveness and complications of the inside-out repair technique to that of the all-inside repair technique in isolated unstable peripheral longitudinal ("bucket-handle") meniscal tears.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Computerized keyword searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ACP Journal Club, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were performed. Two reviewers independently performed searches and article reduction. Studies that included stratified data for isolated unstable longitudinal meniscal tears in stable knees, repaired with either an inside-out or all-inside repair technique, were selected. Data on clinical failure, subjective outcome measures, and complications were summarized.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies included data specific to isolated meniscal tears. The rate of clinical failure was 17% for inside-out repairs and 19% for all-inside repairs. Lysholm scores and Tegner activity scores were similar between the 2 repair methods (87.8 vs 90.2 and 5.6 vs 5.5, respectively). The prevalence of nerve injury/irritation was higher with the inside-out technique (9% vs 2%). All-inside techniques had a higher rate of local soft tissue irritation, swelling, and implant migration or breakage. The use of older generation, rigid, all-inside implants is associated with chondral injury.

CONCLUSION

There are no differences in clinical failure rate or subjective outcome between inside-out and all-inside meniscus repair techniques. Complications are associated with both techniques. More nerve symptoms are associated with the inside-out repair and more implant-related complications are associated with the all-inside technique.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Rates of structural healing and complications are comparable for inside-out and all-inside repair techniques for isolated meniscal injury. Differences in observed healing rates after meniscal repair may be more dependent on tear pattern and associated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction rather than an inside-out versus all-inside surgical approach.

Meniscal repair versus partial meniscectomy: a systematic review comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this investigation was to compare reoperation rates and clinical outcomes after meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to identify outcome studies of arthroscopic meniscal repair (inside-out, outside-in, and all-inside techniques) or partial meniscectomy in patients with traumatic meniscal tears. The studies included patients with no previous injuries or operations.

RESULTS

At short- and long-term follow-up, partial meniscectomy had a lower reoperation rate (1.4% [2 of 143] and 3.9% [52 of 1,319], respectively) than isolated meniscal repair (16.5% [47 of 284] and 20.7% [30 of 145], respectively). There was a slightly higher reoperation rate after partial lateral meniscectomy compared with partial medial meniscectomy. Repairs of the medial meniscus resulted in higher reoperation rates than repairs of the lateral meniscus. Meniscal repairs at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction had a lower failure rate than isolated repairs. In the limited number of studies with long-term clinical outcome scores, meniscal repair was associated with higher Lysholm scores and less radiologic degeneration than partial meniscectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas meniscal repairs have a higher reoperation rate than partial meniscectomies, they are associated with better long-term outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.