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

MRI Criteria for Healing at 1 Year After Repair of a Traumatic Meniscal Tear

BACKGROUND

Meniscal repair for a traumatic meniscal tear is increasingly used to preserve the meniscus. Interpreting postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans remains challenging, especially in symptomatic patients. There is a lack of reliable MRI criteria to affirm the healed character of a traumatic meniscal injury repair.

PURPOSE

To identify relevant MRI criteria for meniscal healing after meniscal repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

We prospectively included all patients with a traumatic meniscal injury who underwent either an isolated meniscal repair or a repair during a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A standardized preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluation was performed, along with collection of functional scores-Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm Score, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. An MRI scan was performed 1 year postoperatively and compared with the preoperative MRI scan. The following MRI aspects were analyzed: variation of morphology and fat-saturated (FS) T2 intensity signal and pre- and postoperative tear diastasis measurement.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (age, mean ± SD, 28.7 ± 8.5 years [range, 16-45 years]) who were 1 year postoperative were included. All patients were considered clinically healed had the same MRI characteristics. A signal change (FS T2) was observed from a high signal intensity fluid to a nonfluid moderate signal intensity. The morphology of the lesion was more complex: from the initial lesion, line ramifications appeared, creating the appearance of tree branches. The tear diastasis decreased (from 2.3 ± 0.5 mm [range, 1.3-3.5] to 1.1 ± 0.28 mm [range, 0.5-1.5]).

CONCLUSION

MRI criteria confirming meniscal healing after traumatic meniscal repair at 1 year were identified: a change in the intrameniscal signal becoming nonfluid and moderate in intensity; a reduction in tear diastasis to <1.5 mm; and a change in the signal morphology of the repaired meniscus.

Greater rate of return to play and re-injury following all-inside meniscal repair compared to the inside-out technique: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Inside-out and all-inside arthroscopic meniscal repairs are widely performed. However, it remains unclear which method promotes greater clinical outcomes. This study compared inside-out versus all-inside arthroscopic meniscal repair in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), failures, return to play, and symptoms.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Two authors independently performed the literature search by accessing the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus in February 2023. All clinical studies which investigated the outcomes of all-inside and/or inside-out meniscal repair were considered.

RESULTS

Data from 39 studies (1848 patients) were retrieved. The mean follow-up was 36.8 (9 to 120) months. The mean age of the patients was 25.8 ± 7.9 years. 28% (521 of 1848 patients) were women. No difference was found in PROMs: Tegner Activity Scale (P = 0.4), Lysholm score (P = 0.2), and International Knee Document Committee score (P = 0.4) among patients undergoing meniscal repair with all inside or inside-out techniques. All-inside repairs showed a greater rate of re-injury (P = 0.009) but also a greater rate of return to play at the pre-injury level (P = 0.0001). No difference was found in failures (P = 0.7), chronic pain (P = 0.05), reoperation (P = 0.1) between the two techniques. No difference was found in the rate of return to play (P = 0.5) and to daily activities (P = 0.1) between the two techniques.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic all-inside meniscal repair may be of special interest in patients with a particular interest in a fast return to sport, while, for less demanding patients, the inside-out suture technique may be recommended. High-quality comparative trials are required to validate these results in a clinical setting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review.

Clinical Outcome of Arthroscopic Repair for Isolated Meniscus Tear in Athletes

Increased knowledge of the long-term destructive consequences of meniscectomy has created a shift towards operative repair of isolated meniscus lesions. However, in the literature the results of isolated meniscal repair in athletes currently remain underreported. Our objective was to investigate the clinical and functional outcomes as well as survival and return to sport in patients who underwent meniscal repair after isolated meniscal tear, with a focus on athletes (both professional and recreational) in the study population. This retrospective study included 52 athletes who underwent knee surgery for isolated meniscal tear between 2014 and 2020. Patients with concomitant ligamentous and/or chondral injury were not included in this study. The mean age of the patients was 25.5 years (ranging from 12 to 57 years). The mean follow-up period of all patients was 33.3 months (ranging 10 to 80 months). The mean purpose of the study was to report the return to sport. The International Knee Documentation Committee rating (IKDC), Lysholm score, the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Tegner activity level were determined at the follow-up. Failure was defined as re-operation with meniscectomy or revision meniscal repair. In total, 44 out of 52 patients (85%) returned to their previous sports activities. At follow-up, the mean Lysholm score was 90, representing a good to excellent result. Assessment of KOOS (mean value 88.8) and IKDC (mean value 89) scores also showed good to excellent results. A mean level of Tegner scale was 6.2, indicating a relatively high level of sports participation. Failure was encountered in 8 out of 52 knees (15%). Therefore, isolated meniscal repair resulted in good to excellent knee function and most athletes can return to their previous level of sports participation.

Patients older than 55 years regain sporting and recreational activities after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

(1) To compare sporting and recreational activity levels before and at a minimum 6 year follow-up, and (2) to assess the clinical and functional outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in patients older than 55 years.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected data of 150 patients with a mean age of 64 ± 4.5 (57-74) years was evaluated 8.6 ± 1.4 (6-11) years after primary ACL reconstruction using hamstring autograft. All patients were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee scoring system (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner activity level, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The level of recreational activities was assessed using a sport-specific questionnaire. All patients were categorized according to Isolated and Combined ACL injury groups.

RESULTS

The data of 125 patients were analyzed at the last follow-up. While 25 patients were lost to follow-up, 117 of 125 patients were active before their injury in at least one sports discipline compared to 121 of 125 patients after ACL reconstruction. One hundred and two (82%) patients had returned to their recreational activities at the final follow-up. The mean IKDC subjective score increased from 49.5 ± 23.2 (11.5-100) to 76.2 ± 14.8 (33.3-100) (p < 0.0001). The mean KOOS sport increased significantly from 36 ± 36.2 (0-100) to 74.1 ± 25.5 (0-100) (p < 0.0001). The mean VAS score improved from 6.0 ± 2.6 (0-10) to 1.0 ± 1.4 (0-6) (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the median Tegner activity level (preoperative 5 (2-8) vs. follow-up 5 (2-8) (n.s). There was no significant difference in the number of sports disciplines and duration when comparing pre-injury and mid-term follow-up activity after ACL reconstruction. High-impact activities experienced a significant decline, while a significant increase in participation in low-impact activities was recorded.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with symptomatic instability regained their pre-injury recreational activity level with excellent clinical and functional outcomes after arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. Nevertheless, a change from high-to low-impact activities has been observed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Primary Fixation and Cyclic Performance of Single-Stitch All-Inside and Inside-Out Meniscal Devices for Repairing Vertical Longitudinal Meniscal Tears

BACKGROUND

Primary device fixation and the resistance against gap formation during repetitive loading influence the quality of meniscal repair. There are limited biomechanical data comparing primary tensioning and cyclic behavior of all-inside versus inside-out repair.

HYPOTHESIS

All-inside devices provide higher initial load on the meniscal repair than inside-out fixation, and stiffer constructs show higher resistance against gap formation during cyclic loading.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

In total, 60 longitudinal bucket-handle tears in human cadaveric menisci were created and repaired with a single stitch and randomly assigned to 4 all-inside groups (TrueSpan, FastFix 360, Stryker AIR, FiberStich) and 2 inside-out groups (suture repair [IO-S], suture tape [IO-ST]). Residual load after repair tensioning (50 N) and relief displacement were measured. Constructs underwent cyclic loading between 2 and 20 N over 500 cycles (0.75 Hz) with cyclic stiffness, gap formation, and final peak elongation measured. Ultimate load and stiffness were analyzed during pull to failure (3.15 mm/s).

RESULTS

All-inside repair demonstrated significantly higher primary fixation strength than inside-out repair. The significantly highest load (mean ± SD; 20.1 ± 0.9 N; P < .037) and relief displacement (-2.40 ± 0.32 mm; P < .03) were for the knotless soft anchoring FiberStich group. The lowest initial load (9.0 ± 1.5 N; P < .001) and relief displacement (-1.39 ± 0.26 mm; P < .045) were for the IO-S repair group. The final gap formation (500th cycle) of FiberStich (0.75 ± 0.37 mm; P < .02) was significantly smaller than others and that of the IO-S (1.47 ± 0.33 mm; P < .045) significantly larger. The construct stiffness of the FiberStich and IO-ST groups was significantly greater at the end of cyclic testing (16.7 ± 0.80 and 15.5 ± 1.42 N/mm; P < .042, respectively) and ultimate failure testing (23.4 ± 3.6 and 20.6 ± 2.3 N/mm; P < .005). The FastFix 360 (86.4 ± 4.8 N) and Stryker AIR (84.4 ± 4.6 N) groups failed at a significantly lower load than the IO-S group (P < .02) with loss of anchor support. The FiberStich (146.8 ± 23.4 N), TrueSpan (142.0 ± 17.8 N), and IO-ST (139.4 ± 7.3 N) groups failed at significantly higher loads (P < .02) due to suture tearing.

CONCLUSION

Overall, primary fixation strength of inside-out meniscal repair was significantly lower than all-inside repair in this cadaveric tissue model. Although absolute differences among groups were small, meniscal repairs with higher construct stiffness (IO-ST, FiberStich) demonstrated increased resistance against gap formation and failure load.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Knotless single-stitch all-inside meniscal repair with a soft anchor resulted in less gapping, but the overall clinical significance on healing rates remains unclear.

Meniscal Repair Outcomes at Greater Than 5 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The utilization of meniscal repair techniques continues to evolve in an effort to maximize the rate of healing. Meniscal repair outcomes at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively appear to better represent the true failure rates. Thus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature was conducted to assess the rate of failure at a minimum of 5 years after meniscal repair.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of studies reporting the outcomes of meniscal repair at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. A standardized search and review strategy was utilized. Failure was defined as recurrent clinical symptoms or a meniscal reintervention to repair or resect the meniscus in any capacity, as defined by the study. When reported, outcomes were assessed relative to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) status, sex, age, and postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Meta-analyses were performed with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies of 1,612 patients and 1,630 meniscal repairs were included in this review and meta-analysis. The pooled overall failure rate was 22.6%, while the failure rate of modern repairs (excluding early-generation all-inside devices) was 19.5%. Medial repairs were significantly more likely to fail compared with lateral repairs (23.9% versus 12.6%, p = 0.04). Failure rates were similar for inside-out (14.2%) and modern all-inside repairs (15.8%). Early-generation all-inside devices had a significantly higher failure rate (30.2%) compared with modern all-inside devices (15.8%, p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in meniscal failure rate between repairs with concomitant ACL reconstruction (21.2%) and repairs in ACL-intact knees (23.3%, p = 0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Modern meniscal repair had an overall failure rate of 19.5% at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. Modern all-inside techniques appear to have improved the success rate of meniscal repair compared with use of early-generation all-inside devices. Lateral repairs were significantly more likely to be successful compared with medial repairs, while no difference was seen between patients undergoing meniscal repair with and without concomitant ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

A systematic review about long-term results after meniscus repair

PURPOSE

Aim of this systematic review was to analyze long-term results after meniscus refixation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out in various databases on studies on long-term results after meniscus refixation with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Primary outcome criterion was the failure rate. Secondary outcome criteria were radiological signs of osteoarthritis (OA) and clinical scores.

RESULTS

A total of 12 retrospective case series (level 4 evidence) were identified that reported about failure rates of more than 7 years follow-up. There was no statistical difference in the failure rates between open repair, arthroscopic inside-out with posterior incisions and arthroscopic all-inside repair with flexible non-resorbable implants. In long-term studies that examined meniscal repair in children and adolescents, failure rates were significantly higher than in studies that examined adults. Six studies have shown minor radiological degenerative changes that differ little from the opposite side. The reported clinical scores at follow-up were good to very good.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrates that good long-term outcomes can be obtained in patients after isolated meniscal repair and in combination with ACL reconstruction. With regard to the chondroprotective effect of meniscus repair, the long-term failure rate is acceptable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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.

Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a reliable option to treat knee instability in patients over 50 years old

PURPOSE

To evaluate return to sport and clinical outcomes with at least 2 years followup after arthroscopic reconstruction ACL in population over 50 years-old.

METHODS

eighty-one patients aged 50 years or older underwent isolated, primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft between 2014 and 2016. In all patients, a period of conservative treatment had failed (minimum 6 months), and they complained of functional instability and/or limitation during daily activity. Patients were assessed preoperatively and at the latest follow-up with a physical examination, return to sports activity, the Lysholm score, the International Knee Documentation Committee scoring system, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the Tegner activity scale. Data regarding complications and revision surgeries were collected at 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

At the last follow-up, significant improvement in outcome scores from pre- to postoperative assessments was found. The mean overall IKDC score increased from a preoperative mean of 54.4-82.9 (p < 0.001). Mean preoperative Lysholm score increased from a preoperative mean of 67.4-90.4 (p < 0.001). The mean overall KOOS score increased from a preoperative mean (p < 0.001). Median preoperative Tegner score was 5 (range 2-8) and median postoperative score was 5 (range 1-7). 86% of patients returned to the sport, 51% to their preinjury sports level. Tegner score, before accident, was the only positive influencing factor a return to pre-injury level of the sport.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic reconstruction ACL in patients over 50 years-old resulted in excellent functional outcomes, with most patients returning to sport and at the same level they had before the injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

The modified cross-suture technique for unilateral pulled-out anchor during all-inside meniscal repair

Background

Meniscal repair has received increasing attention, but for inexperienced doctors, unilateral suture anchor pulling out may occur during all-inside meniscal repair, and the treatment outcome may be affected. When the errors happened intraoperatively, how to minimize the loss under guaranteeing of treatment effectiveness is a topic worth studying.

Purpose

To explore the practicability and effectiveness of the modified cross-suture method for arthroscopic remediation of unilateral suture anchor pulling out of an all-inside meniscal repair system.

Methods

From May 2014 to May 2017, 28 patients diagnosed with injuries of the meniscus and anterior cruciate ligaments (ACL) from the First Department of Orthopaedics of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University were enrolled in the study as the observation group, including 18 males and 10 females with an average age of 25.5 ± 2.3 years (range 18–42 years). All patients underwent ACL reconstruction concurrently. All meniscus injuries were repaired with an all-inside meniscal repair technique, and 1–3 needles of unilateral suture anchor pulling out occurred intraoperatively. The modified cross-suture method was used to remedy the error of anchor pulling out and to eventually complete an effective repair. Another 30 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction and all-inside meniscal concurrently without unilateral suture anchor pulling out, including 20 males and 10 females with an average age of 26.3 ± 1.9 years (range 19–45 years), were enrolled as the control group. During postoperative follow-up, range of motion, Lachman test and pivot shift test were performed during the physical examination. The clinical healing of the meniscus was evaluated according to the Barrett standard. The meniscus healing status was also confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The function of the knee joint was evaluated according to the IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores.

Results

Twenty-five patients in the observation group and 28 patients in the control group completed the follow-up, with an average follow-up of 18.4 ± 5.2 months. All operations were performed by the same surgeon. At the follow-up 1 year after the operation, the average knee ROM of the two groups was 125.2 ± 4.3 degrees and 124.7 ± 3.8 degrees, the clinical healing rate of the meniscus of the two groups was 92.0% (23/25) and 92.9% (26/28), the MRI healing rate of the menniscus of the two groups was 72.0% (18/25) and 71.4% (20/28), and the IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores of the two groups were 90.52 ± 2.8, 89.17 ± 3.1, and 6.81 ± 1.7 and 91.42 ± 1.9, 90.32 ± 3.4, and 7.02 ± 1.4, respectively. The differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The modified cross-suture method is practicable and effective for arthroscopic remediation of unilateral suture anchor pulling out in an all-inside meniscal repair system.

Predictive Factors for Failure of Meniscal Repair: A Retrospective Dual-Center Analysis of 918 Consecutive Cases

Background:

Meniscal surgery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by orthopaedic surgeons. Over the past decade, awareness has increased regarding the importance of meniscal preservation to prevent the development of osteoarthritis in the knee joint. Removal of meniscal tissue can lead to a high risk of cartilage degeneration, and moreover, meniscus-preserving surgery rather than meniscal resection is likely to have better long-term outcomes. Success rates after meniscal repair range from 60% to 95%, but many reports are based on a small number of patients.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to review all meniscal repairs and potential predictors for failure during a 12-year period. We hypothesized that meniscal anchors, lateral repairs, and repairs made in conjunction with an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) would have fewer failures than meniscal arrows, medial repairs, and isolated repairs. We also hypothesized that younger patients and acute tears would be associated with fewer failures.

Study Design:

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

This study was a dual-center, retrospective analysis on consecutive meniscal repairs. The surgical protocols were reviewed, including type of tear, location, associated injury to the knee, and surgery. The study endpoint was failure of repair, defined as a need for reoperation and secondary partial or total meniscal resection, within 3 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to assess repair survival, with multivariate Cox regression to adjust for confounders.

Results:

A total of 954 meniscal repairs were performed on 918 patients (536 male patients [58%]; 382 female patients [42%]) with a mean age of 26 years (range, 12-60 years). The failure rate for the entire cohort was 22.5%. Bioabsorbable arrows had significantly more failures than all-inside sutures with anchors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.5; P = .002). Medial meniscal repairs had a higher failure rate than lateral meniscal repairs (HR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.3-6.0; P < .001). Simultaneous ACLR resulted in less failure than when no simultaneous ACLR was performed (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.9; P = .009). Age at repair and acuity of tear did not affect the outcome (P = .6 and .07, respectively).

Conclusion:

The failure rate after meniscal repair was significantly higher on the medial side, especially when using arrows. Meniscal repairs performed concomitantly with an ACLR result in fewer reoperations.