Meniscal ramp lesions – Skillful neglect or routine repair?

Identifying unstable ramp lesions using ultrasonography

BACKGROUND

Patients with suspected ramp lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasonography (US) healed and showed no instability based on intraoperative arthroscopic findings. The purpose of this study was to assess the use of US in evaluating ramp lesions preoperatively and intraoperatively.

METHODS

Eighty-two knees that underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction between January 2022 and June 2023 were included to assess the ramp lesion complication rate and instability using arthroscopic findings. The detection rate of ramp lesions using US at the initial visit and preoperatively was also investigated. The test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and analyzed using two-way random effects and absolute agreement. The patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of ramp lesions, and these data were compared using Student's t-test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

On ultrasound examination, 90.0% of the cases had a ramp lesion at the initial examination, of which 22.2% were poorly delineated on the day of surgery. In the cases where the ramp lesion was unstable at the time of surgery, it could be delineated using US. In the cases where the ramp lesion was stable, it was difficult to delineate the lesion using US.

CONCLUSIONS

Unstable ramp lesions complicating ACL injuries could be detected using US.

Biomechanical impact of meniscal ramp lesions on knee joint contact characteristics in ACL deficient knees: a cadaveric analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the changes in contact characteristics of the tibiofemoral joint resulting from a meniscal ramp lesion in the medial meniscus.

METHODS

Twelve cadaveric knees (six matched pairs) were subjected to a 600 N axial load using a custom testing jig, which allowed for knee positioning at 0°, 45°, and 90° of flexion without other constraints. The knees were randomly assigned to either a ramp lesion group (n = 6) or a posterior root lesion group (n = 6). Four testing conditions were examined: (1) intact, (2) isolated ramp lesion, (3) isolated posterior root tear of the medial meniscus, and (4) combined ramp lesion and posterior root tear of the medial meniscus. Contact characteristics were evaluated using a flexible pressure sensor, the I-Scan System.

RESULTS

Peak contact pressure in isolated ramp lesions (4.15 ± 0.98 MPa, P = 0.206) showed non-significant increases compared to the intact condition (3.86 ± 1.32 MPa). Peak contact pressure in isolated posterior root tears (4.58 ± 1.70 MPa, P = 0.040) and, combined ramp and posterior root lesions (4.67 ± 1.47 MPa, P = 0.003) were significantly higher than that in the intact condition. The knee flexion position significantly affected the medial tibiofemoral joint's contact area, contact pressure, and peak contact pressure (P < 0.001 for all).

CONCLUSION

Isolated ramp lesions did not significantly impact force transmission, contact area, or contact pressure. In contrast, isolated root lesions and combined ramp and posterior root tears of the medial meniscus significantly intensified the changes in contact characteristics in the medial tibiofemoral joint compared to the intact condition.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Meniscal ramp lesion classification systems: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To describe the proposed classification systems for meniscal ramp lesions (RLs) in the literature and evaluate their accuracy and reliability.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines utilising PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. Level I-IV studies referencing RLs along with either an arthroscopic- or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based classification system used to describe RL subtypes were included.

RESULTS

In total, 21 clinical studies were included. Twenty-seven (79%) of the included studies were published in 2020 or later. There were four main classification systems proposed within the literature (two arthroscopic-, two MRI-based), describing tear patterns, mediolateral extent, associated ligament disruption and stability of the lesion. The first classification was proposed in 2015 by Thaunat et al. and is referenced in 22 (64.7%) of the included studies. The application of the Thaunat et al. criteria to MRI showed variable sensitivity (31.70%-93.8%) and interobserver agreement (k = 0.55-0.80). The Greif et al. modification to the Thaunat et al. system was referenced in 32.4% of the included studies and had a substantial interobserver agreement (k = 0.8). Stability to probing and specific tear location were each used to classify RLs in 28.6% and 23.8% of the included clinical studies, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although there has been a recent increase in the recognition and treatment of meniscal RLs, there is limited consistency in descriptive classifications used for this pathology. Current RL classification systems based on preoperative MRI have variable reliability, and arthroscopic examination remains the gold standard for diagnosis and classification.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Increased Intra-Articular Internal Tibial Rotation Is Associated With Unstable Medial Meniscus Ramp Lesions in ACL-Injured Athletes: An MRI Matched-Pair Comparative Study

Purpose

To analyze internal tibial rotation through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries with and without an unstable medial meniscal ramp lesion (MMRL).

Methods

Retrospective analysis of prospectively data was performed to include all consecutive patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) between January 2022 and June 2022. Two groups, ACLR + unstable MMRL and ACLR without MMRL, were constituted. Propensity score matching analysis was used to limit selection bias. The angle between surgical epicondylar axes (SEAs) and the tangent line of the posterior tibial condyles (PTCs) was measured to analyze the rotational alignment between distal femur and proximal tibia. MMRLs were defined unstable if they were ≥1 cm, if the lesions extend beyond the lower pole of the femoral condyle, and/or if there was displacement into the medial compartment by anterior probing.

Results

Twenty-eight propensity-matched pairs were included. The ACLR + unstable MMRL presented a significantly greater internal rotation of the tibia compared to ACLR without MMRL (P < .001). An internal tibial rotation was associated with unstable ramp lesions in ACL-injured patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.41; P < .0001). If SEA-PTC was 0°, the sensitivity and specificity of the SEA-PTC angle to detect unstable MMRL were respectively 100% (95% CI, 85%-100%) and 18% (95% CI, 8%-36%). Otherwise, if SEA-PTC angle was -10°, the sensitivity and specificity of the SEA-PTC angle to detect unstable MMRL were respectively 43% (95% CI, 27%-61%) and 96% (95% CI, 81%-100%). Bone edema of the posterior medial tibial plateau was significantly associated with unstable ramp lesions (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.21-2.06; P = .029).

Conclusions

Unstable MMRL concomitant to an ACL rupture was associated with an increased tibial internal rotation.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative trial.

Evaluating the Reliability of YouTube as a Source of Information for Meniscal Ramp Lesions

Background

Videos uploaded to YouTube do not go through a review process, and therefore, videos related to medial meniscal ramp lesions may have little educational value.

Purpose

To assess the educational quality of YouTube videos regarding ramp lesions of the meniscus.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

A standard search was performed on the YouTube website using the following terms: "ramp lesion" and "posterior meniscal detachment" and "ramp" and "meniscocapsular" and "meniscotibial detachment," and the top 100 videos based on the number of views were included for analysis. The video duration, publication data, and number of likes and views were retrieved, and the videos were categorized based on video source (health professionals, orthopaedic company, private user), the type of information (anatomy, biomechanics, clinical examination, overview, radiologic, surgical technique), and video content (education, patient support, patient experience/testimony).The content analysis of the information on the videos was evaluated with the use of the DISCERN instrument (score range, 16-80), the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (score range, 0-4), and the Global Quality Score (GQS; score range, 1-5).

Results

A total of 74 videos were included. Of these videos, 70 (94.6%) were published by health professionals, while the remaining 4 (5.4%) were published by orthopaedic companies. Most of the videos were about surgical technique (n = 36; 48.6%) and all had an educational aim (n = 74; 100%). The mean length of the videos was 10.35 ± 17.65 minutes, and the mean online period was 18.64 ± 13.85 months. The mean DISCERN score, JAMA benchmark score, and GQS were 31.84 ± 17.14 (range, 16-72), 1.65 ± 0.87 (range, 1-4), and 2.04 ± 1.21 (range, 1-5), respectively. Videos that reported an overview about ramp lesions were the best in terms of quality for DISCERN and JAMA benchmark score, while biomechanics videos were the best according to GQS. The worst category of videos was about surgical technique, with all having lower scores.

Conclusion

The educational content of YouTube regarding medial meniscal ramp lesions showed low quality and validity based on DISCERN score, JAMA benchmark score, and GQS.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, meta-analysis.

The effect of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and RAMP lesion repair on psychological status

BACKGROUND

There are few studies examining anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and RAMP lesion repair. However, no studies have investigated the level of functional performance and psychological state after ACLR and all-inside RAMP lesion repair.

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of ACLR and RAMP lesion repair on psychological status. ACLR and meniscal RAMP lesion repair were hypothesized to be associated with better psychological outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a cohort study.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ACLR with semitendinosus and gracilis autografts by a single surgeon were determined retrospectively. Fifteen patients who underwent ACLR and all-inside meniscus RAMP lesion repair (ACLR-RR) and 15 patients who underwent isolated ACLR were compared. Patients were evaluated by a physiotherapist at least 9 months after surgery. The primary outcome measure was anterior cruciate ligament-return to sports after injury (ACL-RSI), and the psychological status of the patients was examined. Secondary outcomes were visual analog scale (VAS), Tegner activity score, Lysholm knee score, single hop tests, and limb symmetry index (LSI). While pain intensity at rest and during movement was evaluated with VAS, functional performance level was evaluated with the Tegner activity score, the Lysholm knee score, single hop tests, and limb symmetry index (LSI).

RESULTS

A significant difference was found in the ACL-RSI values in the ACLR-RR group compared to the isolated ACLR group (p = 0.02). The results of the groups in VAS scores at rest and during movement, Tegner activity levels, and Lysholm knee scores, in the intact and operated leg single hop tests (single leg hop, cross hop, triple hop, and six-meter hop test), and the LSI values in the single leg hop tests showed no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed different psychological outcomes and similar functional levels for ACLR and all-inside meniscus RAMP repair compared with isolated ACLR. It was observed that the psychological status of patients with RAMP lesions should also be evaluated.

No evidence in support of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in adults with degenerative and nonobstructive meniscal symptoms: a level I evidence-based systematic review

PURPOSE

It is unclear whether the results of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) are comparable to a structured physical therapy (PT). This systematic review investigated efficacy of APM in the management of symptomatic meniscal damages in middle aged patients. Current available randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared APM performed in isolation or combined with physical therapy versus sham arthroscopy or isolated physical therapy were considered in the present systematic review.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. All the level I RCTs which investigated the efficacy of AMP were accessed. Studies which included elderlies with severe OA were not eligible, nor were those in which APM was combined with other surgical intervention or in patients with unstable knee or with ligaments insufficiency. The risk of bias was assessed using the software Review Manager 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen). To rate the quality of evidence of collected outcomes, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used.

RESULTS

Data from 17 studies (2037 patients) were collected. 48.5% (988 of 2037 patients) were women. The mean age of the patients was 52.7 ± 3.9 years, the mean BMI 27.0 ± 1.3 kg/m². The current evidence suggests no difference in functional PROMs (quality of the evidence: high), clinical PROMs (quality of the evidence: high), pain (quality of the evidence: high), quality of life (quality of the evidence: high), physical performance measures (quality of the evidence: moderate), and OA progression (quality of the evidence: moderate).

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of APM in adults with degenerative and nonobstructive meniscal symptoms are limited. The current evidence reports similarity in the outcome between APM and PT. Further long-term RCTs are required to investigate whether APM and PT produce comparable results using validated and reliable PROMs. Moreover, future RCTs should investigate whether patients who might benefit from APM exist, clarifying proper indications and outcomes. High quality investigations are strongly required to establish the optimal PT regimes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.