Meniscal repair by all-inside technique with Fast-Fix device

Comparing Surgical Techniques for Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review of Radiographic and Functional Outcomes

Meniscal tears are a common orthopedic injury. The management approaches for meniscal tears include both surgical and non-surgical procedures; however, the majority of the surgeons opt for various surgical interventions. This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of different surgical techniques for meniscal tears. The systemic search was carried out in various databases including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus. Studies that investigated surgical techniques for meniscal repair and published between 2010 to 2023 were included. Out of the 7,421 potential studies identified from databases and Google Scholar search, only 17 studies were included in our systemic review. The follow-up periods ranged from 6 weeks to 123 months. Adverse effects were reported in some studies, including joint line tenderness, swelling, and loss of flexion, while others reported no significant adverse events. Pull-out repair and refixation techniques demonstrated better clinical outcomes and slower arthritic progression than partial meniscectomy. Mason-Allen stitches and simple stitches yielded comparable results, and both inside-out and all-inside techniques had similar clinical and functional outcomes. This systematic review provides valuable insights into the outcomes of different surgical techniques for meniscal tears. Further studies with longer follow-up periods may help assess the long-term effectiveness of these surgical techniques.

Remnant preserving ACL reconstruction with a functional remnant is related to improved laxity but not to improved clinical outcomes in comparison to a nonfunctional remnant

PURPOSE

The Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) remnant has been pointed out as a ligamentization enhancer. Nonetheless, the remaining tissue can be functional if it still provides some stability or nonfunctional. This study intends to compare the clinical results and knee stability of functional vs. nonfunctional remnant preservation ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-five patients with ACL injuries were included and underwent remnant preservation ACLR. They were divided into two groups accordingly to remnant tissue functionality: functional (Group F) and nonfunctional (Group NF). Primary outcome was defined as patient reported outcomes measured with Lysholm, IKDC and Tegner continuous scales and improvements. Secondary outcomes comprised of Lachman test, anterior drawer test, pivot shift test, extension and flexion deficit, graft coverage by remnant preserved tissue and failure rate (persistent instability or new ACL lesion). Menisci lesions, cartilage lesions and time to surgery were also recorded for each group.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four patients were available at a mean of 30.2 ± 10.1 months: 69 Functional and 75 Nonfunctional. Lysholm, IKDC and Tegner functional outcomes demonstrated no difference between the groups, Functional compared to Nonfunctional: 88.4 ± 10.5 vs. 92.2 ± 4.9, n.s. and 83.2 ± 11.3 vs. 87 ± 5.3, n.s. and 6 (5-10) vs. 6 (5-9), n.s., respectively. Lysholm and IKDC functional outcomes improvements demonstrated differences between the groups: Functional compared to Nonfunctional (39.3 ± 9.4 vs. 42.3 ± 7.4, p = 0.014 and 37.7 ± 10 vs. 41.0 ± 6.6, p = 0.032); however, they were not clinically significant. Functional group showed more stability on physical examination pre- and post-operatively (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). There was no difference regarding extension deficit (n.s.); however, functional group had more flexion deficit (p = 0.02). Nonfunctional group had better graft coverage (p = 0.001). There was no difference regarding failure rate: 4% vs. 9%, (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

Both remnant preservation ACLR techniques were able to achieve satisfactory functional outcomes. A functional remnant was not related to improved functional outcomes in comparison to a nonfunctional remnant; however, it was related to less laxity pre and postoperatively and inferior graft coverage.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

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

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