Complications of Meniscus Surgery:

Bailout Options for Intra-operative Implant and Instrumentation Related Incidents and Complications During Arthroscopic Knee Surgery-A Retrospective Study

Background

Arthroscopic knee procedures are one amongst the common surgical interventions for problems in the knee. It is technically more demanding than an open procedure and is associated with several potential complications. During arthroscopy procedures, several technical challenges may arise, and even experienced surgeons may encounter new issues. However, careful attention to the surgical technique can help prevent or resolve them.

Methodology

The study was conducted on all patients who underwent knee arthroscopy procedure during study period. We recorded details of the implants used and any unexpected situations related to them, as well as how they were managed. Instrumentation-related parameters such as screwdriver issues, radiofrequency ablator issues, scope damages, shaver complications, probe complications, and meniscus suture passing devices were also assessed.

Results

In total, there were 12 (3.73%) implant and instrument-related incidents and complications, of which 5 (1.55%) were implant-related and 7 (2.17%) were instrument related. Among the instrumentation-related incidents and complications, two (0.62%) were screwdriver breakage incidents, two (0.62%) were radiofrequency ablator-related incidents, one was arthroscopic probe (0.31%) related incident, one (0.31%) was meniscus suture passing device related complication and one (0.31%) was arthroscope related incident.

Conclusion

Surgeons must be ready to anticipate and effectively manage any technical difficulties that may arise during the procedure, maintaining composure in the face of unexpected challenges and guiding the team. In most cases, incidents can be addressed intra operatively and may not have long-term effects on patient outcomes. It is crucial to have multiple implant and instrument backup options available for successful surgery.

Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms

OBJECTIVE

To determine benefits and harms of arthroscopic knee surgery involving partial meniscectomy, debridement, or both for middle aged or older patients with knee pain and degenerative knee disease.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain and physical function.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic searches for benefits and harms were carried out in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to August 2014. Only studies published in 2000 or later were included for harms.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials assessing benefit of arthroscopic surgery involving partial meniscectomy, debridement, or both for patients with or without radiographic signs of osteoarthritis were included. For harms, cohort studies, register based studies, and case series were also allowed.

RESULTS

The search identified nine trials assessing the benefits of knee arthroscopic surgery in middle aged and older patients with knee pain and degenerative knee disease. The main analysis, combining the primary endpoints of the individual trials from three to 24 months postoperatively, showed a small difference in favour of interventions including arthroscopic surgery compared with control treatments for pain (effect size 0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.26). This difference corresponds to a benefit of 2.4 (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 4.3) mm on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale. When analysed over time of follow-up, interventions including arthroscopy showed a small benefit of 3-5 mm for pain at three and six months but not later up to 24 months. No significant benefit on physical function was found (effect size 0.09, -0.05 to 0.24). Nine studies reporting on harms were identified. Harms included symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (4.13 (95% confidence interval 1.78 to 9.60) events per 1000 procedures), pulmonary embolism, infection, and death.

CONCLUSIONS

The small inconsequential benefit seen from interventions that include arthroscopy for the degenerative knee is limited in time and absent at one to two years after surgery. Knee arthroscopy is associated with harms. Taken together, these findings do not support the practise of arthroscopic surgery for middle aged or older patients with knee pain with or without signs of osteoarthritis.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42014009145.

Intraoperative incidents and complications in primary arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

To analyze intraoperative incidents and complications in primary arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and quadruple hamstring semitendinosus and gracilis (STG) grafts.

METHODS

From January 1999 to June 2004, we performed 330 BPTB and 96 STG procedures. Intraoperative incidents and complications were recorded for each case.

RESULTS

Our overall intraoperative incident and complication rate was 9.6% and was higher in the STG group (13.5%) than in the BPTB group (8.7%). In the BPTB group, combined incidents and complications according to stage of the procedure consisted of graft harvesting, 4 cases (1.21%); tunnel placement, 9 cases (2.7%); and graft fixation, 15 cases (4.5%). In the STG group, combined incidents and complications included graft harvesting, 8 cases (8.3%); tunnel placement, 1 case (1%); graft fixation, 3 cases (3.1%); and others, 1 case (1%). In 4 patients (0.9%), we had to change the technique from BPTB to STG and vice versa. In 2 STG cases, conversion of the technique was required because of graft-related problems; in the third case, it was necessary because of fixation. One BPTB was converted to STG because the graft was completely transected as a result of improper screw fixation technique.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the encountered incidents and complications had an adverse effect on final stability or on range of motion in operated knees. All incidents and complications were due to technical errors that occurred during graft harvesting, tunnel placement, or graft fixation. It is known that technical errors are preventable if careful surgical technique is followed. The surgeon must be well versed in various reconstruction techniques to be able to detect and resolve forthcoming incidents or complications. Backup implants are mandatory.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, therapeutic case series.