Factors Predicting Failure Rates and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Arthroscopic Meniscal Repair

Advances in meniscus tissue engineering: Towards bridging the gaps from bench to bedside

Meniscus is vital for maintaining the anatomical and functional integrity of knee. Injuries to meniscus, commonly caused by trauma or degenerative processes, can result in knee joint dysfunction and secondary osteoarthritis, while current conservative and surgical interventions for meniscus injuries bear suboptimal outcomes. In the past decade, there has been a significant focus on advancing meniscus tissue engineering, encompassing isolated scaffold strategies, biological augmentation, physical stimulus, and meniscus organoids, to improve the prognosis of meniscus injuries. Despite noteworthy promising preclinical results, translational gaps and inconsistencies in the therapeutic efficiency between preclinical and clinical studies exist. This review comprehensively outlines the developments in meniscus tissue engineering over the past decade (Scheme 1). Reasons for the discordant results between preclinical and clinical trials, as well as potential strategies to expedite the translation of bench-to-bedside approaches are analyzed and discussed.

Comparison of Subsequent Surgery After Repair in Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears and Meniscectomy Analysis of a Large, Contained Cohort Study

Background

Bucket-handle meniscal tears are large longitudinal vertical meniscal tears that have an attached fragment flipped into the intercondylar notch. Meniscal repair attempts to restore the function of the meniscus and aims to preserve joint mechanics. Alternatively, meniscectomy results in quicker recovery but may lead to future degeneration.

Purposes

To evaluate the long-term risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery in patients who underwent a bucket-handle meniscal repair (BHMR) versus meniscectomy/bucket-handle meniscal debridement (BHMD) and assess risk factors associated with subsequent knee surgical intervention.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

An electronic health records search for all patients who underwent arthroscopic knee meniscal surgery (repair and meniscectomy) between 2011 and 2018 was performed. Natural language processing was used to search for terms of interest in the long operative notes to determine whether these surgeries were performed for bucket-handle meniscal tears. These patients comprised our initial cohort. Study patients were followed for at least 1 year and for up to 5 years (until December 31, 2019), with censoring at death or membership disenrollment. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes were evaluated via a database review. The primary outcome was subsequent ipsilateral knee surgeries and secondary outcomes included contralateral knee surgeries, deep surgical site infections, and venous thrombotic events. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to model for subsequent surgical treatment of the ipsilateral knee. A subset analysis for patients aged 30 to 50 years was then performed.

Results

The median follow-up time was 52.4 months (interquartile range [IQR], 33.5-60 months). A total of 1359 patients underwent BHMR and 1537 patients underwent BHMD. The median age was 24 years (IQR, 17-34 years) for the BHMR versus 38 years (IQR, 27-47 years) for the BHMD group (P < .001). Body mass index (BMI) was significantly lower in the BHMR group compared with the BHMD group (P < .001). BHMR was significantly more likely to be performed during a concomitant ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) than a BHMD (44.2% vs 30.1%, P < .001). During the follow-up period, a total of 656 subsequent ipsilateral procedures were performed in 393 (13.6%) patients. Patients who underwent initial BHMR were at a significantly higher risk of undergoing subsequent meniscal repair (4.3% vs 1%, P < .001), meniscectomy (12.1% vs 3.3%, P < .001), and ACLR (7.4% vs 2.9%, P < .001) compared with those who underwent BHMD. Multivariable analysis showed that BHMR, younger age, and lower BMI were risk factors for subsequent ipsilateral surgery. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, subset analysis showed that for patients aged 30 to 50 years, undergoing a BHMR versus a BHMD led to a 2.3-fold higher risk of subsequent surgery, a 5.3-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscal repair and a 3.2-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscectomy.

Conclusion

BHMR was more often performed in younger patients with a lower BMI, especially during a concomitant ACLR. Patients treated with BHMR were more likely to undergo subsequent surgeries, with the likelihood decreasing with increasing age. Subset analyses showed increasing risk for subsequent surgeries with BHMR versus BHMD in the cohort consisting of patients aged 30 to 50 years.

Low meniscus reoperation rates following meniscus repair during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in Turkey: an in-depth national analysis of 8-years

BACKGROUND

Concomitant knee injuries, such as meniscal tears, are observed in up to 80% of cases and can have a detrimental impact on outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Over recent decades, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of preserving meniscal tissue. Consequently, the prevalence of meniscal-preserving procedures has been on the rise.

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence of concurrent meniscal procedures, assess the success rate, and identify factors associated with the failure of meniscal repair in patients undergoing ACLR.

METHODS

All patients who underwent ACLR due to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury between January 2015 and December 2022 were extracted from the Republic of Türkiye National health system using operation-specific procedure codes. Patients with multiple ligament injuries, revision ACL patients, and patients with missing data were excluded from the study. The treatment methods were grouped into the subsets of meniscectomy, meniscal repair, transplantation, and meniscectomy + repair. The distribution of ACLR and meniscus treatment methods according to years, age and sex groups, hospital characteristics, and geographical regions was examined. A secondary analysis was performed to assess the effect of patient demographics and hospital healthcare level on revision meniscal procedures in the ACLR + concomitant meniscal repair group.

RESULTS

A total of 91,700 patients who underwent ACLR between 2015 and 2022 were included in the study. A concomitant meniscal procedure was noted in 19,951(21.8%) patients (16,130 repair,3543 meniscectomy). In the 8 years studied, meniscus repair rates increased from 76.3%to87.9%, while meniscectomy rates decreased from 23.7%to12.1% (p < 0.001). The revision meniscus surgery rate following ACLR + meniscal repair was 3.7%at a mean follow-up of 50 ± 26 months. The interval between primary and revision surgery was 20.5 ± 21.2 months. The meniscectomy rates were higher in community hospitals, while private hospitals showed the lowest revision meniscus surgery rates. Younger age was associated with increased meniscus repair failure rates.

CONCLUSION

The propensity towards using repair techniques to treat meniscal tears during concurrent ACLR has significantly increased in Turkey. Age and the healthcare level of the treating hospital affect the success of meniscal repair.

Blood Flow in the Meniscus Can Be Visualized Arthroscopically Using an Intravenous Indocyanine Green Solution Diluted 10× in a Pig Model

Purpose

To determine the optimal indocyanine green (ICG) dose required for assessing vascularity in the meniscus using ICG fluorescence-guided knee arthroscopy in a pig model.

Methods

A 3-month-old Japanese esculent female pig was used in this study. Intravenous injections of ICG (25 mg) were administered with 2.0 mL of 5×, 10×, 100×, and 1,000× diluted solutions. An additional experiment was conducted to assess the microvasculature within the meniscus considering the results of the optimal dilution setting. A radial tear was purposely induced in the middle-to-posterior section of the medial meniscus to observe vascularity in the cross-sectioned meniscus; the optimal ICG dilution was administered.

Results

No fluorescence was detected in the meniscus with solutions diluted by 1,000× and 100×. Fluorescence was visualized at the anterior portion of the synovium and the anterior cruciate ligament using ICG diluted by 10×. Diluting ICG by 5×, contrast enhancement was too intense for observation. Therefore, the 10× diluted solution was considered the optimal setting for knee arthroscopy and observation of the radial tear. No fluorescence was observed in the cross section of the medial meniscus. Arterial hemorrhage was observed by stimulating the fluorescence-dyed synovium adjacent to the tear site. Through the additional waiting time after stimulating the tear site, the hemorrhage inside the meniscus became more intense.

Conclusions

The optimal dilution and dose setting of ICG for knee arthroscopy was 10× in a 2.0-mL intravenous injection. The meniscus showed no active blood flow, even in the red-red zone. This finding might support the notion that blood flow cannot be initiated, without synovial stimulation, even in vascular areas.

Clinical Relevance

This study could determine an ICG solution suitable for ICG fluorescence-guided knee arthroscopy. This finding could be valuable in future research focusing on case-specific meniscal vascularization under arthroscopy, particularly applying these findings to human meniscal treatment.

Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears Might Not Be an Urgency: The Time to Meniscus Repair Does Not Seem to Affect the Mid-Term Outcome-A Retrospective Study of Sixty Tears with a Mean Follow-Up of 6 Years

Background: Bucket-handle meniscal tears are mostly treated arthroscopically. However, there is no clear evidence as to whether the time to surgery impacts the outcome and whether or not lesions should be treated urgently. Methods: Sixty patients were interviewed about the current status of their knee with a mean follow-up of 6.1 years (SD = 3.5). Forty-one patients underwent meniscus repair, and fifteen patients received partial resections. The primary outcome was the rate of reoperation after meniscus repair. Secondary outcomes were pain at rest and during exercise, return to sports, and Tegner and Lysholm scores. Results: The average time to surgery was 14.4 days, with no significant impact of surgical timing on the rate of reoperation. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in pain levels, return to sports, or Tegner and Lysholm scores based on the timing of surgery. Conclusions: In our cohort, the time to surgery was not a prognostic factor for the reoperation rate or postoperative outcome in repairing bucket-handle meniscal tears. Therefore, arthroscopic repair should not be performed in an emergency setting but conducted after careful planning by experienced arthroscopy surgeons. Regarding the return to sports, postoperative factors such as rehabilitation protocols or surgical techniques could be more important than the time to surgery.

Indocyanine Green Fluorescence-Guided Knee Arthroscopy: A Technical Note for Investigating the Microvasculature Around the Meniscus

Vascularity of the meniscus is the most important key to meniscal tear healing. However, blood supply to the meniscus is limited to approximately the outer 10% to 25% of the meniscus, known as the "red-red zone." The cyanine dye indocyanine green (ICG) is commonly used as a contrast imaging agent for visualizing vascularity in several medical fields. Moreover, ICG fluorescence-guided surgery is a modern trend in the field of laparoscopic surgery in which the characteristic of fluorescence enhancement under a near-infrared light is used. However, ICG fluorescence-guided knee arthroscopy findings remain unknown. In this Technical Note, the author applied ICG fluorescence-guided surgery to knee arthroscopy to evaluate blood supply to the meniscus and intra-articular apparatus. Additionally, the arthroscopic findings of ICG fluorescence-guided knee arthroscopy for degenerative tears of the medial meniscus before and after meniscal repair are presented. Through the intravenous injection of ICG solution, real-time detection of fluorescence may contribute to investigating case-specific vascularization of the meniscus during arthroscopy in the next generation.

Clinical outcome of iterative meniscal suture after ACL reconstruction at a minimum of 2 years' follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Failure rates in meniscal suture associated to ACL reconstruction range from 10 to 26.9%, often leading to meniscectomy. In young patients, the wish to conserve the meniscus may lead to iterative suture, if the lesion allows. There are no data available for clinical results of repeat meniscal suture at the same site as the primary lesion in a stabilized knee. The immediate socioeconomic cost, compared to meniscectomy, needs to be taken into account, and benefit needs to be demonstrated. The main aim of the present study was to assess the rate of secondary meniscectomy after iterative meniscal suture in stabilized knees. The study hypothesis was that failure rates are higher in iterative isolated meniscal suture after ligament reconstruction than in primary repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective study analyzed patients receiving iterative meniscal suture on stable knee, between 2009 and 2019, with a minimum 26 months' follow-up. Twenty-three patients were analyzed: 15 male, 8 female; mean age at iterative suture, 28.1±7.9 years (range, 14-49 years); mean BMI, 24.2±2.9kg/m2 (range, 19-31). Mean time to recurrence was 38.9±25.1 months (range, 6-93 months). Initial ACL graft used the patellar ligament in 69.6% of cases (n=16) and the hamstrings in 30.4% (n=7). Mean differential laximetry before iterative suture was 1.7±0.3mm (range, 1.2-2.3mm). Iterative suture was in the medial meniscus in 69.6% of cases (16/23) and in the lateral meniscus in 30.4% (7/23). Risk factors for failure, defined by requirement for meniscectomy, were assessed. Functional results were assessed on Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Tegner score.

RESULTS

The failure rate was 48% (11/23), incorporating all lesions together. Bucket-handle tear was most frequently associated with failure (91%; p<0.01). There was significant improvement after iterative suture in subjective IKDC score (51.6±15.2 vs. 81.3±15.6; p<0.001) and KOOS scores: symptoms and stiffness, 66.6±13.7 vs. 91.1±7.53 (p<0.001); pain, 79.2±12.7 vs. 93.4±7.4 (p<0.01); function, 91.3±11.2 vs. 97.9±4.44 (p<0.001); quality of life, 38.1±23.2 vs. 62.3±30.1 (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The failure rate for iterative meniscal suture on stabilized knee was 48%. Bucket-handle tear was a major risk factor for failure (91%). Despite these high failure rates, functional results systematically improved.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Manipulation Under Anesthesia and/or Lysis of Adhesions After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Female Basketball Players: Does Race Play a Role?

BACKGROUND

Arthrofibrosis can limit function and return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Previously reported risk factors for developing arthrofibrosis after ACL reconstruction include female sex, age <18 years, time from injury to surgery <28 days, concomitant meniscal repair, prolonged immobilization, and genetic factors. There is a lack of evidence regarding whether race plays a significant role.

HYPOTHESIS

The risk of undergoing manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) and/or lysis of adhesions (LOA) after primary ACL reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft in female basketball players is higher in African American players than in White players.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Using a computerized relational database, the authors identified competitive female basketball players who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with BTB autograft by the senior author over a 13-year period. Data previously entered from examinations and surgical findings were reviewed retrospectively. Univariate statistics and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess the relationship between undergoing subsequent MUA and/or LOA and study predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 186 knees (114 African American knees and 72 White knees) met inclusion criteria. The overall rate of MUA and/or LOA was 8.6%. Thirteen African American knees (11.4%) and 3 White knees (4.2%) underwent MUA and/or LOA for treatment of arthrofibrosis. No study predictor was found to have a statistically significant relationship with the rate of MUA and/or LOA on univariate analysis. However, when controlling for body mass index and previously described risk factors (age <18 years, time from injury to surgery ≤28 days, and concomitant meniscal repair) in the logistic regression model, the authors found that MUA and/or LOA was more likely in African American (odds ratio, 4.01 [95% CI, 1.01-15.92]; P = .049) than in White female players and in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction within 28 days of injury (odds ratio, 4.01 [95% CI, 1.18-13.57]; P = .026) compared with those with surgery delayed beyond 28 days.

CONCLUSION

In female basketball players, the present study found a statistically significantly increased risk for undergoing MUA and/or LOA after primary ACL reconstruction with BTB autograft in African American females compared with White females and in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction within 28 days of injury.

Failure rate, return-to-sports and magnetic resonance imaging after meniscal repair: 119 patients with 7 years mean follow up

BACKGROUND

One of the most important factors to consider in relation to meniscal repair is the high failure rate reported in the existing literature.

AIM

To evaluate failure rates, return to sports (RTS) rate, clinical outcomes and magnetic resonance image (MRI) evaluation after meniscus suture repair for longitudinal tears at a minimum 2-year-follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of meniscal repairs between January 2004 and December 2018. All patients treated for longitudinal tears associated or not with an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) were included. Meniscal ramp lesions, radial and root tears, associated with multiligament injuries, tibial fracture and meniscal allograft transplants were excluded. Surgical details and failure rate, defined as symptomatic patients who underwent a revision surgery, were analyzed. As isolated bucket handle tears (BHTs) were usually associated with higher failure rates, we compared BHTs and not BHTs associated or not with an ACL-R. Since 2014, the inside-out technique using cannulas and suture needles with 2-0 Tycron began to predominate. In addition, the number of stitches per repair was increased. In view of differences in surgical technique, we compared two different cohorts: before and after 2014. We recorded the RTS according to the level achieved and the time to RTS. Lysholm and IKDC scores were recorded. Patients were studied with x-rays and MRI as standard postoperative control.

RESULTS

One hundred and nineteen patients were included with a mean follow up of 7 years (SD: 4.08). Overall failure rate was 20.3% at a mean 20.1 mo. No statistically significant differences were found when comparing failure for medial and lateral meniscal repair (22.7% and 15.3%, P = 0.36), BHTs and not BHTs (26% and 17.6%, P = 0.27), isolated or associated with an ACL-R (22.9% and 18%, P = 0.47), or when comparing only BHTs associated with an ACL-R (23% and 27.7%, P = 0.9) or not. When comparing cohorts before and after 2014, we found a significant decrease in the overall failure rate from 26% to 11% (P < 0.03). Isolated lesions presented a decrease from 28% to 6.6% (P = 0.02), BHTs from 34% to 8% (P = 0.09) and those associated with an ACL-R from 25% to 10% (P = 0.09). Mean RTS time was 6.5 mo in isolated lesions and 8.64 mo when associated with an ACL-R. Overall, 56% of patients returned to the same sport activity level. Mean pre and postoperative Lysholm scores were 64 and 85 (P = 0.02), and IKDC 58 and 70 (P = 0.03). Out of 84 asymptomatic patients evaluated with MRI, 39% were classified as "not healed" and 61% as "healed".

CONCLUSION

Even though the overall failure rate of our series was 20.3%, we found a statistically significant decrease from 26% to 11%, not only for isolated lesions, but also for BHT's and those associated with an ACL-R when comparing our series in two different cohorts, most probably due to improvements in surgical technique.

Arthroscopic Meniscectomy vs Meniscal Repair: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes

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

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).

Long-term clinical results of using a posteromedial all-inside and anteromedial inside-out approach to repair unstable or irreducible bucket-handle medial meniscal tears

BACKGROUND

In irreducible bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs), the displaced central fragment is rotated 180° or more, meaning reduction is impossible without derotation of the tear. In chronic cases, the rotated meniscus is deformed and degenerated; thus, the issue of reproducibility and repairability arises. This study presents the clinical outcomes of chronic irreducible and unstable locked BHMMTs. Radiological outcomes were also evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 37 patients with 11 cases of irreducible BHMMT and 26 cases of reducible but unstable chronic BHMMT who underwent operations between 2011 and 2016. Posterior arthroscopy was performed after temporary meniscus fixation using a provisional needle fixation technique. After the posterior repair with vertical mattress sutures was completed using an all-inside technique, the classic outside-in technique was performed for the anterior third of the meniscus. The Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Tegner activity scores were obtained from all patients before surgery and at the latest follow-up. Radiological evaluations were performed using MRI before surgery and at 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2016, a total of 37 consecutive patients with irreducible and chronic BHMMTs underwent surgery. The average postoperative follow-up was 7.2 ± 1.4 years (mean ± SD). Postoperative Lysholm (89.57 ± 2.7) and IKDC (87.22 ± 3.2) scores improved significantly at the last follow-up when compared with the pre-operative scores (38.44 ± 4.5 and 23.52 ± 7.8, respectively). According to the Tegner activity scale, patients' postoperative activity levels remained unchanged compared to preoperative levels at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Posterior knee arthroscopy with the all-inside posterior suture and inside-out anteromedial suture technique presented in this study yielded excellent clinical outcomes when used to repair chronic irreducible or unstable BHMMTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Cartilage Repair of the Tibiofemoral Joint With Versus Without Concomitant Osteotomy: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes

Background

The extent to which concomitant osteotomy provides an improvement in clinical outcomes after cartilage repair procedures is unclear.

Purpose

To review the existing literature to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cartilage repair of the tibiofemoral joint with versus without concomitant osteotomy.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that directly compared outcomes between cartilage repair of the tibiofemoral joint alone (group A) versus cartilage repair with concomitant osteotomy (high tibial osteotomy [HTO] or distal femoral osteotomy [DFO]) (group B). Studies on cartilage repair of the patellofemoral joint were excluded. The search terms used were as follows: osteotomy AND knee AND ("autologous chondrocyte" OR "osteochondral autograft" OR "osteochondral allograft" OR microfracture). Outcomes in groups A and B were compared based on reoperation rate, complication rate, procedure payments, and patient-reported outcomes (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, satisfaction, and WOMAC).

Results

Included in the review were 5 studies (1 level 2 study, 2 level 3 studies, 2 level 4 studies) with 1747 patients in group A and 520 patients in group B. The mean patient ages were 34.7 and 37.5 years in groups A and B, respectively, and the mean lesion sizes were 4.0 and 4.5 cm², respectively. The mean follow-up time was 44.6 months. The most common lesion location was the medial femoral condyle (n = 999). Preoperative alignment averaged 1.8° and 5.5° of varus in groups A and B, respectively. One study found significant differences between groups in KOOS, VAS, and satisfaction, favoring group B. The reoperation rates were 47.4% and 17.3% in groups A and B, respectively (P < .0001).

Conclusion

Patients undergoing cartilage repair of the tibiofemoral joint with concomitant osteotomy might be expected to experience greater improvement in clinical outcomes with a lower reoperation rate compared with those undergoing cartilage repair alone. Surgeons preparing for cartilage procedures of the knee joint should pay particular attention to preoperative malalignment of the lower extremity to optimize outcomes.

Failure Rates of Repaired Bucket-Handle Tears of the Medial Meniscus Concomitant With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study of 253 Patients From the SANTI Study Group With a Mean Follow-up of 94 Months

BACKGROUND

Failure rates of repaired bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs) concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are as high as 20%. The outcomes of posteromedial portal suture hook repair have not been compared with all-inside repair techniques for this subtype of meniscal lesion.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and failure rates of patients who underwent BHMMT repair concomitant with ACLR using an all-inside technique, suture hook + all-inside technique, or suture hook + outside-in technique. It was hypothesized that no significant differences in failure rates would be found between the groups.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with a BHMMT who underwent meniscal repair during primary ACLR and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped based on the meniscal repair technique used: all-inside repair, suture hook + all-inside repair, or suture hook + outside-in repair. At the end of the study period, secondary medial meniscectomy rates were determined.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 253 patients who underwent repair of a BHMMT with concomitant ACLR with a mean follow-up of 94.0 ± 47.6 months. A total of 114 patients (45.1%) underwent all-inside repair, 61 patients (24.1%) underwent suture hook + all-inside repair, and 78 patients (30.8%) underwent suture hook + outside-in repair. Overall, there were 36 failures. The failure rates were 20.2%, 14.8%, and 5.1%, respectively (P = .0135). All-inside repairs were >4 times more likely to fail than suture hook + outside-in repairs (hazard ratio [HR], 4.103; 95% CI, 1.369-12.296; P = .0117). Failure was also 3 times higher (HR, 2.943; 95% CI, 1.224-7.075; P = .0159) for patients <30 years of age compared with those aged ≥30 years. An additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was also found to reduce the failure rate of repaired BHMMTs concomitant with ACLR.

CONCLUSION

Combined suture hook + outside-in repair of BHMMTs resulted in significantly fewer failures than all other techniques. Furthermore, age <30 years and no additional ALLR were associated with higher failure rates.

The anterior cruciate ligament injury severity scale (ACLISS) is an effective tool to document and categorize the magnitude of associated tissue damage in knees after primary ACL injury and reconstruction

PURPOSE

To develop a tool allowing to classify the magnitude of structural tissue damage occurring in ACL injured knees. The proposed ACL Injury Severity Scale (ACLISS) would provide an easy description and categorization of the wide spectrum of injuries in patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction, reaching from isolated ACL tears to ACL injuries with a complex association of combined structural damage.

METHODS

A stepwise approach was used to develop the ACLISS. The eligibility of each item was based on a literature search and a consensus between the authors after considering the diagnostic modalities and clinical importance of associated injuries to the menisci, subchondral bone, articular cartilage or collateral ligaments. Then, a retrospective analysis of associated injuries was performed in 100 patients who underwent a primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) by a single surgeon. This was based on acute preoperative MRI (within 8 weeks after injury) as well as intraoperative arthroscopic findings. Depending on their prevalence, the number of selected items was reduced. Finally, an analysis of the overall scale distribution was performed to classify the patients according to different injury profiles.

RESULTS

A final scoring system of 12 points was developed (12 = highest severity). Six points were attributed to the medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartment respectively. The amount of associated injuries increased with ACLISS grading. The median scale value was 4.5 (lower quartile 3.0; higher quartile 7.0). Based on these quartiles, a score < 4 was considered to be an injury of mild severity (grade I), a score between ≥ 4 and ≤ 7 was defined as moderately severe (grade II) and a score > 7 displayed the most severe cases of ACL injuries (grade III). The knees were graded ACLISS I in 35%, ACLISS II in 49% and ACLISS III in 16% of patients. Overall, damage to the lateral tibiofemoral compartment was predominant (p < 0.01), but a proportional increase of tissue damage could be observed in the medial tibiofemoral compartment with the severity of ACLISS grading (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The ACLISS allowed to easily and rapidly identify different injury severity profiles in patients who underwent primary ACLR. Injury severity was associated with an increased involvement of the medial tibiofemoral compartment. The ACLISS is convenient to use in daily clinical practice and represents a feasible grading and documentation tool for a reproducible comparison of clinical data in ACL injured patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The role of patient characteristics and the effects of angiogenic therapies on the microvasculature of the meniscus: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Considerable interindividual variation in meniscal microvascularization has been reported. The purpose of this review was to identify which patient characteristics affect meniscal microvascularization and provide a structured overview of angiogenic therapies that influence meniscal neovascularization.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Emcare from inception to November 2021. Studies reporting on (1) Patient characteristics that affect meniscal microvascularization, or (2) Therapies that induce neovascularization in meniscal tissue were included. Studies were graded in quality using the Anatomical Quality Assessment (AQUA) tool. The study was registered with PROSPERO(ID:CRD42021242479).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies reported on patient characteristics and eleven on angiogenic therapies. The influence of Age, Degenerative knee, Gender, and Race was reported. Age is the most studied factor. The entire meniscus is vascularized around birth. With increasing age, vascularization decreases from the inner to the peripheral margin. Around 11 years, blood vessels are primarily located in the peripheral third of the menisci. There seems to be a further decrease in vascularization with increasing age in adults, yet conflicting literature exists. Degenerative changes of the knee also seem to influence meniscal vascularization, but evidence is limited. Angiogenic therapies to improve meniscal vascularization have only been studied in preclinical setting. The use of synovial flap transplantation, stem cell therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor, and angiogenin has shown promising results.

CONCLUSION

To decrease failure rates of meniscal repair, a better understanding of patient-specific vascular anatomy is essential. Translational clinical research is needed to investigate the clinical value of angiogenic therapies.

Spontaneous Healing of a Posteriorly Displaced Lateral Meniscus Bucket-Handle Tear in a Multiligament Knee Injury: A Case Report

CASE

Bucket-handle meniscus tears (BHMTs) typically involve the medial meniscus and often occur with concomitant rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. We report an unusual case of a polytrauma patient who sustained a bicruciate multiligament knee injury (MLKI) with a posteriorly displaced lateral BHMT that spontaneously healed after reduction of the fragment. At the 2-year follow-up, the lateral meniscus was clinically stable without pain.

CONCLUSION

A lateral BHMT with a posteriorly displaced fragment produced an atypical magnetic resonance imaging presentation in a bicruciate MLKI. Meniscal repair was aborted because of extravasation and concerns of compartment syndrome, but spontaneous healing occurred after fragment reduction.

Intra-articular injection of stromal vascular fraction for knee degenerative joint disease: a concise review of preclinical and clinical evidence

Autologous fat-derived stromal vascular fraction (SVF) is a mixed cell population that has been used for many years in regenerative plastic surgery. In terms of animal and clinical research, this concise review was performed to evaluate the efficacy of SVF in knee degenerative joint disease (KDJD), which could cause pain, disability and severely affect patients' lives. Thirteen studies retrieved and screened from the databases were included, including six animal studies and seven clinical trials. The meta-analysis of clinical research shows that intra-articular injection of SVF, in combination with adjuvant surgery, could alleviate pain and improve early functional recovery for patients with KDJD at Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grades II-III.

Surgical Outcomes After Bucket-Handle Meniscal Repairs: Analysis of a Large Contained Cohort

BACKGROUND

Representing approximately 10% of all meniscal tears, bucket-handle meniscal tears (BHMTs) are large longitudinal vertical tears that have an attached fragment flipped into the intercondylar notch. Meniscectomy often results in significant meniscal loss and increased joint loading. Alternatively, meniscal repair attempts to restore the function of the meniscus and aims to preserve joint mechanics.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery in patients who underwent a bucket-handle meniscal repair (BHMR), and to assess risk factors associated with subsequent knee surgical intervention.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

We performed an electronic health record search for all patients aged 12 to 65 years who underwent arthroscopic knee meniscal repairs for BHMT (2011-2018). We excluded patients who had a previous BHMR, did not have magnetic resonance imaging of the knee within 60 days before BHMR, lacked active membership in Kaiser insurance in the year before and after BHMR, or underwent meniscectomy before BHMR. All patients were followed until December 31, 2019, with censoring at death or membership disenrollment. Primary outcomes included ipsilateral knee procedures overall and by type (ie, repeat meniscal repair and meniscectomy); secondary outcomes included other surgical interventions of the same knee, any contralateral knee surgery, deep surgical-site infection, and deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 1359 patients with a median age of 24 years (interquartile range [IQR], 17-34) who underwent BHMR for a BHMT. During the follow-up period (median, 50.2 months [IQR, 32.3-60.6]), 495 subsequent ipsilateral procedures were performed in 274 (20.2%) patients, and the median time to the first procedure was 10.6 months (IQR, 4.1-23.5). An overall 59 (4.3%) patients underwent repeat meniscal repair, and 165 (12.1%) had a subsequent meniscectomy of the same knee. Significant risk factors for subsequent ipsilateral procedures included younger age, 12 to 18 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 5.77 [95% CI, 1.84-18.08]) and 19 to 30 years (aOR, 3.65 [95% CI, 1.17-11.36]), as well as normal and overweight body mass index (aOR, 2.84 [95% CI, 1.29-6.23] and 2.34 [95% CI, 1.06-5.17], respectively). Patients undergoing concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) at the initial BHMR had a lower risk of undergoing subsequent surgery (aOR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.49-0.87]) than those without concomitant ACLR.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest reported study on outcomes after BHMR in a contained cohort. One-fifth of patients underwent subsequent ipsilateral surgery during follow-up, with 4.3% receiving a repeat meniscal repair and 12.1% experiencing a meniscectomy. Risk factors for subsequent surgery of the same knee included younger age and normal or overweight body mass index. Concomitant ACLR at time of BHMR reduced the risk of subsequent reoperation.

Higher healing rate after meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction for tears located in vascular zone 1 compared to zone 2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the percentage of completely healed meniscal tears after arthroscopic repair combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) for the different vascular zones of the meniscus.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Emcare were searched on 19 May 2020 for articles reporting healing rates after arthroscopic meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR for the different meniscal vascular zones as assessed by second-look arthroscopy. Data on meniscal tears were extracted as located in zones 1, 2 or 3, according to the Cooper classification. Studies were graded in quality using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled analyses were performed utilizing a random-effects model. Meta-analyses were performed using R version 3.6.2 and SPSS statistical software version 25.0. The study was registered with PROSPERO (ID:CRD42020176175).

RESULTS

Ten observational cohort studies met the inclusion criteria, accounting for 758 meniscal tear repairs in total. The pooled overall proportion of healing was 78% (95% CI 72-84%). The mean weighted proportion of healing was 83% (95% CI 76-90%) for studies (n = 10) reporting zone 1 tears and 69% (95% CI 59-79%) for studies (n = 9) reporting zone 2 tears. No study reported healing rates for zone 3 tears. The pooled overall odds ratio was 2.5 (95% CI 1.00-6.02), indicating zone 1 tears as 2.5 times more likely to heal than zone 2 tears.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that meniscal tears localized in vascular zone 1 were more likely to heal than those in zone 2.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A longer duration from injury to surgery is associated with preoperative deterioration of an isolated meniscal tear in patients aged 40 years or older

PURPOSE

To evaluate the preoperative deterioration of an isolated meniscal tear in patients aged 40 years or older, and whether time from injury to surgery is associated with worsening of a meniscal tear.

METHODS

Patients aged 40 years or older who underwent arthroscopic surgery for isolated meniscal tear between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. The diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and arthroscopic findings were compared to evaluate the deterioration of meniscal tears. Predictors of the development of meniscal tears; patient demographic factors, duration from injury to surgery (injury to MRI and MRI to surgery), and image findings were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients (58 knees) were included (mean age, 55.9 ± 8.5 years; male/female, 31/27). An isolated meniscal tear deteriorated in 28 (48.3%). Compared patients with and without deteriorated meniscal tear, significant differences were found in the MRI grade of meniscal tear (p = 0.03), duration from injury to MRI (164.2 ± 167.9 vs 45.2 ± 48.7 days, p < 0.001), and from MRI to surgery (148.8 ± 91.1 vs 67.6 ± 56.7 days, p < 0.001). A multivariate regression analysis showed that the duration from injury to MRI (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; p < 0.001) and from MRI to surgery (OR, 1.02; p < 0.001) were independent predictors.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 50% of isolated meniscal tears deteriorated preoperatively in patients aged 40 years or older. The duration from injury to surgery was an independent predictor of worsening of an isolated meniscal tear.

What Is the Failure Rate After Arthroscopic Repair of Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Meniscal repair has become the treatment of choice for meniscal tears, especially in the subset of bucket-handle meniscal tears (BHMTs). However, a comprehensive estimate of the corresponding failure rate is not available, thus maintaining doubts about the healing potential of these tears. Furthermore, a wide range of factors to predict high failure rates have been reported but with conflicting evidence.

PURPOSE

To determine the failure rate after arthroscopic repair of BHMTs as reported in the literature, compare this with the failure rate of simple meniscal tears extracted from the same studies, and analyze the influence of factors previously reported to be predictive of meniscal repair failure.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted by 2 independent reviewers using principal bibliographic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE). After a stepwise exclusion process, 38 articles met the inclusion criteria. Failure rate data were analyzed with a random-effects proportional meta-analysis (weighted for individual study size), and forest plots were constructed to determine any statistically significant differences between BHMTs versus simple tears (longitudinal, radial, or horizontal), medial versus lateral BHMTs, isolated procedures versus repairs with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and tears in red-red versus red-white zones. Moreover, a meta-regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of patient age and sex, suture technique (in-out or all-inside), time from injury to surgery, mean number of stitches, and length of follow-up on failure rates.

RESULTS

The pooled failure rate was 14.8% (95% CI, 11.3%-18.3%; I² = 77.2%). A total of 17 studies provided failure rates of both BHMT repairs (46/311 repairs) and simple tear repairs (54/546 repairs), demonstrating a significantly higher failure rate for BHMT repairs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.05-2.15; I² = 0%; P = .03). Medial BHMT repairs (RR = 1.94; 95% CI, 1.25-3.01; I² = 0%; P = .003) and isolated repairs (RR = 1.77; 95% CI, 1.15-2.72; I² = 0%; P = .009) had statistically higher risk of failure, but no statistically significant difference was found between tears in red-red versus red-white zones. Among the other factors evaluated with meta-regression, only the mean number of stitches showed a statistically significant effect on failure rates.

CONCLUSION

Based on the currently available literature, this systematic review provides a reasonably comprehensive analysis of failure rate after arthroscopic BHMT repair; failure is estimated to occur in 14.8% of cases. Medial tears and isolated repairs were the 2 major predictors of failure.

Inside-Out Approach to Meniscus Repair: Still the Gold Standard?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary on the current literature and trends regarding use of the inside-out approach to meniscus repair. Additionally, the paper describes the authors preferred techniques for inside-out meniscus repair utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral exposures.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been a substantial increase in recent publications regarding meniscus repair. However, comparisons regarding the optimal repair technique have not been conclusive. Despite the recent increase in use of all-inside devices, multiple investigations with short-to-mid-term follow-up have demonstrated similar rates of meniscus healing between inside-out and all-inside repair techniques. Similarly, current literature describes comparable failure rates of around 20%. There are variations in the profile of complications, with all-inside devices having more implant-related complications and inside-out techniques with higher neurovascular injuries. Inside-out meniscus repair is a versatile, cost-effective technique that remains the gold standard for management of most meniscus tear patterns. Through a thoughtful approach, efficient suture retrieval and repair can be performed while protecting critical neurovascular structures. All-inside meniscus repair devices have increased in popularity and surgeon access, but this technique is not without limitations and comparisons to inside-out meniscus repair demonstrates equivocal outcomes.

Second-Look Arthroscopic Evaluation of Healing Rates After Arthroscopic Repair of Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Evaluation of meniscal healing status after repair is important, as it allows the surgeon to inform patients whether they can increase their activities or return to sports.

Purpose:

To identify the healing rates after arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

Searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases were conducted to identify relevant studies published before June 1, 2020. Studies were eligible for this meta-analysis if they provided data regarding healing status of the meniscus at second-look arthroscopy. Random-effects meta-analyses were generated to provide pooled meniscal healing estimates. We further performed subgroup analysis to investigate the healing rates of the meniscus under different situations.

Results:

A total of 41 studies with 1908 individuals were included in the study. The pooled analysis showed the complete healing rate was 74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-80%), the partial healing rate was 10% (95% CI, 6%-16%), and the failure rate was 12% (95% CI, 10%-15%) for arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that no individual study affected the overall healing rate by >1%. Subgroup analysis found higher meniscal healing rates in patients with the following characteristics: age <40 years, male, body mass index <26, red-red tear location, tear in posterior horn, vertical tear, outside-in technique, repair concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, weight-restricted rehabilitation, and time interval from meniscal repair to second-look arthroscopy >12 months.

Conclusion:

In this systematic review, the complete healing rate was 74%, the partial healing rate was 10%, and the failure rate was 12% for arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation.

Patient-reported outcomes of meniscal repair and meniscectomy in patients 40 years of age and older show similar good results

The purpose of this study is to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients aged 40 years and older who underwent meniscal repair or meniscectomy. All patients aged 40 and older who underwent a meniscal repair at a single institution from 2006 to 2017 were included. Meniscal repair cases were matched with a meniscectomy control group in a 1:3 ratio, selected for an equal proportion of concomitant ACL reconstruction in each group. PROMs, collected at a minimum follow-up of 24 months, included International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form (IKDC), Marx activity scale, and a patient satisfaction scale. The primary outcome was IKDC score, which was compared between groups using a Mann-Whitney U test. Rate of failure, defined as repeat ipsilateral knee surgery or surgeon report of failure, was reported. Thirty-five meniscal repair patients and 131 meniscectomy patients were identified; 28 (80.0%) and 67 (51.1%) completed all PROMs with mean follow-up of 4.9 and 5.2 years, respectively. The mean age was 48.5 ± 7.0 years in the meniscal repair cohort and 52.8 ± 7.1 years in the meniscectomy cohort (p = 0.009). Concomitant ACL reconstruction was present in 46.4% and 49.3% of the meniscal repair and meniscectomy cohorts, respectively (n.s.). The median IKDC score was 78 (IQR 66, 87) in the repair cohort and 77 (IQR 56, 86) in the meniscectomy cohort (n.s.). The median Marx activity scale was 3.5 (IQR 0, 8) in the repair cohort and 3.0 (IQR 0, 9) in the meniscectomy cohort (n.s.). Over 85% of both groups were satisfied or very satisfied with no between-group differences (n.s.). In patients aged 40 years and older, patient-reported outcomes at an average of 5 years postoperatively were satisfactory and similar in patients undergoing meniscal repair and meniscectomy, indicating that age alone should not be a contraindication to meniscal repair.Level of evidence: Level III.

Meniscus Repair Techniques

The menisci play a vital role in maintaining knee function and protecting the chondral surfaces. Acute and chronic tears are common injuries among both young athletes and older patients with early degenerative changes. The progression of physiological derangement and chondral injury after meniscus injury and meniscectomy have prompted interest in expanding meniscus repair techniques. Recent literature encourages an attempt at repair in tear patterns previously declared irreparable if the tissue quality allows. The orthopedic surgeon should understand the multitude of techniques available to them and be prepared to combine techniques to optimize the quality of their repair construct. While biological augmentation may show some promising early results, the quality of the current data precludes strong recommendations in their favor.

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.

Bucket handle meniscus tears in low-resource settings can be successfully treated with a cost-effective technique

PURPOSE

In regions of the world where resources can limit medical care (limited-resource settings, LRS), most meniscal tears are often treated with meniscectomy. A simple, low-cost option for meniscal repair has been developed. We sought to evaluate patient reported outcomes (PROMs) and clinical failure rates of bucket handle meniscus tears (BHTs) treated with meniscal repair in a LRS.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients over 18 who were treated for BHT with meniscal repair in a LRS. Meniscal repair was primarily accomplished using an outside-in technique. Pre-injury and final follow-up PROMs were recorded. Clinical failure was defined as the need for re-operation or symptoms that prevented the patient from returning to recreational activities or work responsibilities.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients with a mean age of 25.4 years were eligible. Two patients sustained a clinical failure (10.5%). At mean follow-up of 40.6 months, there was significant improvement in all PROMs from baseline. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in the failure group compared to the success group in number of knots used, pre-injury Tegner score, number of devices used, suture type, or technique.

CONCLUSION

Bucket-handle meniscal tears can be repaired using a low-cost technique resulting in satisfactory healing rates and excellent outcomes.

Which factors are associated with the prevalence of meniscal repair?

Abstract

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

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

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

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

Study design

Case-control study; level of evidence, 3.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Study design

Case-control study; level of evidence, 3.

Risk factors for all-inside meniscal repair failure in isolation and in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

This study examines the relationship between meniscus tear presentations and failure rates following all-inside repair in isolation and in conjunction with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Eighty seven consecutive patients undergoing all-inside meniscal repair at a single institution from July 2016 to June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Details of patient presentation, tear type and location, the presence or absence of simultaneous ACL reconstruction, and surgical repair details were recorded to evaluate the relationship between patient characteristics and the primary endpoint of repair failure.

RESULTS

Patients were followed for an average of 2.7 ± 0.8 years. Three patients (3.4%) experienced 30-day complications including 1 deep vein thrombosis and 2 joint aspirations. Within the study time frame, 15 repairs (17.2%) failed, with 10 (11.5%) failing within one year of the initial procedure; the average time to failure was 12.3 ± 9.0 months. Patients undergoing concurrent ACL reconstruction were less likely to experience repair failure (9.7% vs. 36.0%, p = .009), while bucket-handle repairs were more likely to fail during the study period (45.0% vs. 9.0%, p = .001). These trends remained after controlling for tear location, body mass index, and number of sutures (ACL reconstruction Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.229, p = .029; Bucket-handle OR: 9.400, p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest concurrent ACL reconstruction at the time of meniscal repair is associated with increased repair survival. The all-inside technique may be successfully used across a variety of tear types and locations, although further study of its efficacy in repairing bucket-handle tears is warranted.

Editorial Commentary: Meniscal Cartilage Suture in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructed Knee; To Absorb or Not to Absorb: That Is the Question

When considering repair of the meniscal cartilages of the knee, the indications for repair must be carefully considered. The morphology of the tear, the zone of injury, and likely vascularity have an impact on patient selection. Patient factors, chronicity of tear, medial or lateral tear, and tear complexity all have a bearing on whether to repair or resect and how best to achieve stable repair. The consequences of meniscectomy are well established, and meniscal tissue resection comes at a cost. The success rates of meniscal cartilage repair are greater when performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Patient outcomes are better for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction when performed with meniscal repair than when partial meniscectomy is performed. The optimal configuration of sutures, the suture material used, and the type of suture technique are all important considerations. The focus of this commentary is on the use of absorbable versus nonabsorbable suture material.

Editorial Commentary: Meniscal Repair-Why Bother?

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