Meniscal repair in the elite athlete: results of 45 repairs with a minimum 5-year follow-up

Continuous suture all-inside meniscal repair technique produces excellent functional outcomes and return to play rates with a low rate of failure

BACKGROUND

The all-inside technique is now the most established treatment for meniscal repair, this usually involves a suture-based repair utilising interrupted sutures. A similar technique using continuous sutures can also be used; however there are no studies in the literature appraising this technique. This study aims to review outcomes for patients undergoing meniscal repair using a continuous suture all-inside technique.

METHODS

We reviewed patients undergoing meniscal repair using a continuous suture all-inside technique over a 5 year period. We recorded demographic details, injury type, surgical procedure, incidence of reoperation, functional outcomes (Tegner-Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score) return to sport and failure of repair.

RESULTS

Data were collected for 37 patients. Mean age was 25.8 years, 81%, were male, median time to theatre was 169 days, mean follow-up time was 2.9 years. Concurrent ACL ruptures were present in 57%, all underwent ACL reconstruction in the same sitting. The mean Tegner-Lysholm score was 89. Mean IKDC score was 90.2. 78% were able to return to sport. Overall failure rate was 10.81%. Increasing age was associated with a decreased IKDC score (p = 0.02). Tegner-Lysholm score was significantly greater in patients with concurrent ACL injuries (p = 0.03) and patients with lateral meniscal tears (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In the first study to review outcomes following continuous all-inside suture-based meniscal repair we demonstrate excellent clinical outcomes with IKDC, Tegner-Lysholm, return to play and failure rates comparable to other commonly used techniques. We conclude that this is an acceptable and cost-effective technique.

Outcomes of Meniscal Repair in Patients Aged 40 and Above: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Meniscal injuries are increasingly common in older age groups. Age is often cited as a contraindication to undergoing meniscal repair due to concerns regarding failure rates. There has recently, however, been an increasing shift towards repair in older populations. The purpose of this study was to review outcomes of meniscal repair in patients over the age of 40.

METHODS

A systematic search of the following databases was conducted of PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify studies reporting failure rates of patients over 40 with meniscal injuries undergoing repair. The definition of meniscus failure was noted for each study evaluated in this systematic review. Further data surrounding clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded and evaluated, when available.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this review, encompassing a total of 316 meniscal repairs in patients over the age of 40 years. The overall failure rate was found to be 15.5% (49/316) (range 0-33.3%). There was no difference in the failure rate in those over 40 vs. under 40, and the two groups had equivalent functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Age should not be considered a contra-indication for meniscal repair. Appropriately selected older patients can have acceptably low failure rates with meniscal repair and similar functional outcomes to those under the age of forty. Meniscal repairs in those over 40 achieved better functional outcomes than patients of the same age group who underwent meniscectomy.

Meniscal Injuries Are Decreasing but Are Increasingly Being Treated Surgically With Excellent Return to Play Rates in Professional Baseball Players

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were to determine the incidence and key characteristics of meniscus injuries in professional baseball players, assess current treatment strategies, determine the return to play rates at any level (RTP) and at the same level (RSL), and identify prognostic factors that predict injury severity.

METHODS

After approval from the Major League Baseball (MLB) Research Committee and our institutional review board, the MLB Health and Injury Tracking System was used to identify meniscus injuries occurring across MLB and Minor League Baseball (MiLB) from 2011 to 2017. Analyzed injuries occurred during normal baseball activity in a player who was active on an MLB or MiLB roster and resulted in at least 1 day missed.

RESULTS

A total of 293 professional baseball players sustained 314 meniscus injuries from 2011 to 2017 (7 years) for a mean of 44.9 injuries/y. Pitchers were the most injured position (31.8%), followed by infielders (26.4%). Catchers and infielders missed the most median number of days (50 days). When comparing injuries to landing leg vs push-off leg in pitchers, injury to the push-off leg resulted in significantly more days missed per injury compared to the lead leg (59.6 vs 39.9 days, P = .048). Overall, RTP was 93.0%, while RSL was 84.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 7 professional baseball seasons, 314 meniscus injuries occurred in 293 players. Pitchers and catchers were most injured, and overall, the number of meniscal injuries per year declined while the percentage of injuries that required surgery increased over time. High rates of RTP were observed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Return-to-sport criteria after isolated meniscus suture: Scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Follow-up care including rehabilitation therapy after isolated meniscal repair remains to be standardized. Thus, no standard criteria are available for the return-to-running (RTR) or return-to-sport (RTS). The objective of this study was to identify criteria for RTR and RTS after isolated meniscal repair, based on a review of the literature.

HYPOTHESIS

Return-to-sport criteria after isolated meniscal repair have been published.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of the literature using the methodology developed by Arksey and O'Malley. The terms "menisc*" and "repair" and "return-to-sport" or "return to play" or "return to run" or "rehabilitation" were used to search the PubMed database on 1st March 2021. All relevant studies were included. All RTR and RTS criteria were identified, analyzed, and classified.

RESULTS

We included 20 studies. Mean RTR and RTS times were 12.9 and 20 weeks, respectively. Clinical, strength, and performance criteria were identified. The clinical criteria included full range-of-motion recovery with no pain, quadriceps wasting, or joint effusion. Strength criteria were a quadriceps and hamstring deficit, no greater than 30% and 15% for RTR and RTS, respectively, compared to the normal side. Performance criteria were successful completion of proprioception, balance, and neuromuscular tests. RTS rates ranged from 80.4% to 100%.

CONCLUSION

Patients must meet clinical, strength, and performance criteria before resuming running and sports. The level of evidence is low, due to the heterogeneity and generally arbitrary choice of criteria. Further large-scale studies are therefore needed to validate and standardize RTR and RTS criteria.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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.

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.

Horizontal Cleavage Meniscus Tears: Biomechanics, Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

» Accounting for up to 24% of all meniscus tears, horizontal cleavage tears (HCTs) are a common pathology orthopaedic practitioners should be comfortable managing.» Historically, HCTs were treated with partial meniscectomy; however, recent studies have demonstrated that these procedures have an adverse biomechanical effect, while HCT repairs restore the knee's natural biomechanics.» Indications for the surgical repair of HCTs remain disputed, but surgery is generally considered for young, active patients and older patients without significant concomitant osteoarthritis.» Early clinical findings surrounding HCT repair are promising. They suggest that this treatment adequately restores meniscus mechanics, leads to good knee functional outcomes, and results in a high likelihood of return to preinjury activity levels.

The Development of a Return to Performance Pathway Involving A Professional Soccer Player Returning From A Multi-Structural Knee Injury: A Case Report

This case report describes a male professional soccer player returning to match play (English Championship League) following a medial meniscectomy that occurred during the course of rehabilitation after Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The player underwent a medial meniscectomy eight months into an ACL rehabilitation program and following 10 weeks of rehabilitation successfully returned to competitive first team match play. This report outlines description of the pathology, the rehabilitation progressions, and the sports specific performance requirements of the player as they progressed through the return to performance pathway (RTP). The RTP pathway included nine distinct phases with evidenced based criteria required to exit each phase. The first five phases were indoor as the player progressed from the medial meniscectomy, through the rehabilitation pathways to the "gym exit Phase". The gym exit Phase was assessed with multiple criteria: a) capacity; b) strength; c) isokinetic dynamometry (IKD); d) hop test battery; e) force plate jumps; and f) supine isometric hamstring rate of force (RFD) development qualities to evaluate the players readiness to start sport specific rehabilitation. The last four phases of the RTP pathway are designed to regain the maximal physical capabilities (plyometric and explosive qualities) in the gym and included the retraining of on-field sport specific qualities utilizing the 'control-chaos continuum.' The player successfully returned to team play in the ninth and final phase of the RTP pathway. The purpose of this case report was to outline a RTP for a professional soccer player who successfully restored specific injury criteria (strength, capacity and movement quality), physical capabilities (plyometric and explosive qualities). and on-field sport specific criteria utilizing the 'control-chaos continuum.'

Level of Evidence

Level 4.

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.

A Comparison of All-inside and Inside-out Meniscal Repair in Elite Athletes

BACKGROUND

The popularization of all-inside (AI) meniscal repair devices has led to a shift away from the historical gold standard of inside-out (IO) meniscal repair without comparative studies to support the change.

PURPOSE

To compare the failure rate and time to failure of AI and IO meniscal repair performed in elite athletes.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of all professional and national- and international-level amateur athletes who underwent meniscal repair, with a minimum of 2-year follow-up between January 2013 and September 2019. Meniscal repair was classified as AI or IO depending on the surgical technique performed. Treatment failure was defined as patients having to undergo subsequent surgery to address a persistent meniscal tear after repair. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine if meniscal repair failure rates differed by the location and technique of meniscal repair. Models were controlled for known risk factors such as age, sex, sport, and concurrent cruciate ligament reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 192 (135 lateral and 57 medial) meniscal repairs were performed in elite athletes during the study period. Overall, 41 (21%) meniscal repairs met the criteria for failure. Medial meniscal tears repaired with the AI technique failed at a significantly higher rate (18/31 [58%]) than medial meniscal tears repaired with the IO technique (6/26 [23%]) or lateral meniscal tears repaired with the AI (9/76 [12%]) or IO (8/59 [14%]) technique (P < .001). Cox proportional hazards modeling revealed that a medial meniscal tear repaired with the AI technique had an almost 8 times greater hazard of failure than a lateral meniscal tear repaired with the AI technique (P < .001). At 1 year postoperatively, 8% of lateral meniscal repairs had failed (regardless of technique), while medial meniscal tears failed at a rate of 16% with the IO technique and 42% with the AI technique. By 2 years, 53% of medial meniscal tears repaired with the AI technique had failed, and by 5 years, 63% had failed.

CONCLUSION

AI repair of medial meniscal tears led to a higher rate of failure than IO repair of medial or lateral meniscal tears in elite athletes. Medial meniscal repair failed at a higher rate than lateral meniscal repair.

Clinical outcomes of a standardized rehabilitation protocol for meniscal repair: A retrospective case series

Background/Purpose: To examine clinical and functional outcomes of patients who underwent meniscal repair with a modified accelerated rehabilitation program. Methods: This study represents a case series of patients who underwent meniscal repair from 2017 to 2019. The mean patient age was 26.6 (range: 15–47) years. Of the 28 total patients, 22 had concomitant anterior cruciate ligament tears that were treated with single-bundle hamstring reconstruction at the time of meniscal repair. All patients were enrolled in a standardized rehabilitation program, allowing early-phase protected weight-bearing and knee mobilization. Patient-reported symptoms, the McMurray test, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) were used to evaluate outcomes. The mean follow-up period was 13 ± 3.1 (range: 9–20) months. Results: Of the participating patients, 75% (22 of 28) returned to their original sports activities. Most patients displayed satisfactory clinical outcomes with significant improvements in IKDC scores. No re-tears were detected. Conclusion: Early protected weight-bearing with progressive early knee mobilization is a safe rehabilitation option after meniscal repair.

Sick leave after arthroscopic meniscus repair vs. arthroscopic partial meniscectomy

Objective

To evaluate sick leave after meniscal repair vs arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) and, for comparison, vs the general population.

Method

Using Swedish register data we included all employed persons aged 19-49 years in the general population of Skåne region and identified those having had meniscus repair or APM in the period of 2005-2012. We retrieved data on sick leave during 1 year before until 2 years after surgery. We used logistic regression to estimate the risk differences of being on sick leave and negative binomial model to analyze differences in the number of days on sick leave.

Results

We included 192 persons with meniscus repair, 2481 with APM, and 376 ​345 references without meniscus surgery. Of these, 55% of meniscus repair group, 43% of APM group had any sick leave in the 2-year period following the surgery, while 17% of the references were on sick leave in the corresponding period. The mean (SD) number of days of sick leave after meniscus repair was 55 (77) days and for APM 37 (86) days. Meniscus repair was associated with higher probability of sick leave compared to APM with an adjusted risk difference of 0.13 (95% CI 0.07-0.19).

Conclusion

Persons undergoing meniscus repair have more frequent and 37% longer periods of sick leave in the short term than persons undergoing APM. However, sick leave in the long-term warrant further attention as successful repair may be associated with less knee osteoarthritis development than APM.

Rates and Levels of Elite Sport Participation at 5 Years After Revision ACL Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data regarding return to play (RTP), level of competition, and longevity of play after revision of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in elite athletes.

PURPOSE

To report RTP rates and competition levels in elite athletes at the point of RTP, as well as at 2 and 5 years after revision ACLR, and the effect of meniscal and chondral pathology at revision surgery on these outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a consecutive series of all revision ACLRs undertaken by the senior author between 2009 and 2019, with a minimum 2-year follow-up, was carried out. Outcome measures were RTP rates and competition level.

RESULTS

A total of 49 knees in 48 elite athletes met the inclusion criteria. After revision ACLR, 43 (87.8%) elite athletes achieved RTP, of whom 75.5% were at the same level. At 2 years after surgery, 39 (79.6%) were still playing, 25 (51%) at the same level; at 5 years after surgery, 20 (44.4%) were still playing, 9 (20%) at the same level. Elite athletes with <50% thickness or no articular cartilage lesions were more likely to RTP (94.6% vs 66.7%; P = .026), as well as return to the same competition level (83.8% vs 50%; P = .047), compared with those with ≥50% thickness chondral lesions. Those without medial meniscal pathology were more likely to RTP at the same level after revision surgery (94.4% vs 64.5%; P = .036). The median time elite athletes continued to play after revision ACLR was 73 months (95% CI, 43.4-102.6); 23 months at the same level (95% CI, 13.6-32.4). The probability of still playing at 5 years after surgery was 55.9%, with a 22.5% chance of maintaining preinjury competition level.

CONCLUSION

In elite athletes, RTP rates and competition level decreased over time after revision ACLR. The presence of >50% thickness chondral pathology was associated with lower RTP rates and competition level at RTP time, while medial meniscal pathology was associated with lower competition level at RTP.

Editorial Commentary: Meniscal Repair, When Possible, Is Better for Patients Than Meniscectomy

Patients do not do as well after meniscectomy as after repair. Although saving the meniscus is not always easy and the success rate of repair is not 100%, repair-when possible-remains the best option for patients in the long run. Meniscal repair rates are on the rise, especially in younger patients, but are not high enough. Recent research has shown that more than 95% of meniscal procedures are partial meniscectomies. Improved surgical techniques and instrumentation, as well as a continued increase in understanding the importance of repair, are leading to an increase in meniscal repair rates. Preserve as much meniscus as possible and as often as possible.

Benefits of Meniscal Repair in Selected Patients Aged 60 Years and Older

Background

Little is known about the benefits and outcomes of meniscal repair in patients older than 60 years.

Purpose

To (1) report the clinical and radiographic outcomes of meniscal repair in patients aged ≥60 years and compare them with matched patients who underwent meniscectomy and (2) identify procedural failures.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

We included 32 knees in 32 patients aged ≥60 years (20 female, 12 male; mean age, 64.5 ± 4.6 years) who underwent meniscal repair surgery at a single medical institution between 2010 and 2020. Patients were matched according to age, sex, body mass index, and meniscal tear type with a comparison cohort who underwent meniscectomy (n = 49 patients [49 knees]; 32 female, 17 male). For all patients, demographic information, clinical history, physical examination findings, treatment details, and radiographic images were reviewed and analyzed. At final follow-up (mean, 42.2 months; range, 13-128 months), patients completed the 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Lysholm score. Clinical failure was defined as revision surgery and/or progression to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A matched-pairs t test was used to analyze differences between the 2 treatment groups, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the rates of knee osteoarthritis and progression to TKA.

Results

The majority of patients had a medial meniscal tear (72.8%), whereas the lateral meniscus was torn in 27.2% of cases. Most tears were located in the meniscal root (56.8%), followed by the posterior horn (34.6%) and midbody (8.6%). At final follow-up, all outcome scores were higher in the repair group compared with the meniscectomy group (IKDC, 78.9 ± 13.4 vs 56.0 ± 15.4; KOOS, 86.6 ± 11.9 vs 61.7 ± 16.2; Lysholm, 88.3 ± 13.3 vs 68.7 ± 15.2, respectively; P < .001 for all). Clinical failure was observed in 22% of patients in the repair group.

Conclusion

All clinical outcome scores were higher in the meniscal repair group compared with the matched meniscectomy group at final follow-up. The clinical failure rate of the repair group was 22%. These findings support meniscal repair in selected patients aged ≥60 years.

Rehabilitation and return to sports after isolated meniscal repairs: a new evidence-based protocol

PURPOSE

Despite many protocols that have been proposed, there's no consensus in the literature regarding the optimal rehabilitation program and return to sports (RTS) protocol following isolated meniscal repair. The aim of this current concept review is to look at the evidence of rehabilitation and RTS program after isolated meniscal repair, focusing on general and specific protocols per type of injury trying to give some guidelines based on the current state of knowledge.

METHODS

A narrative literature review was performed searching PubMed database to identify relevant articles from January 1985 to October 2021 on rehabilitation and RTS after isolated meniscal repair. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case series, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cadaveric studies and basic science studies were included.

RESULTS

When the hoop tensile stress effect is preserved, an accelerated rehabilitation program may be suggested. Hence, partial weight bearing (20 kg) in association with ROM limited to 90° is allowed for the first four weeks, followed by weight bearing as tolerated. In contrast, when circumferential hoop fibers are disrupted, a restricted rehabilitation protocol may be recommended. In this scenario no weight bearing is allowed for the first six weeks after the surgery and range of motion (ROM) is limited to 90°.

CONCLUSION

Biomechanical evidence suggests that tailoring an individualized protocol based upon the type of lesion and meniscus stability is reasonable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

Arthroscopic meniscus repair and augmentation with autologous fibrin clot in Indian population: A 2-year prospective study

INTRODUCTION

This study was proposed to evaluate the efficacy of fibrin clot augmentation in meniscal tear using inside-out meniscal repair.

METHODS

A total of 35 patients with meniscus tears were operated on with inside-out meniscus repair and fibrin clot augmentation. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively with clinical criteria, Lysholm knee scoring system, and MRI.

RESULTS

Out of the total 35 cases, 5 cases were lost to follow-up. Clinical improvement was observed in 29 out of 30 patients (96.6%). The mean Lysholm score improved significantly from 67.63 ± 6.55 points preoperatively to 92.0 ± 2.9 points postoperatively (P < 0.05) in 3 years follow-up. Follow-up MRI in all patients revealed complete healing except in 1 case where the patient presented with recurrence of symptoms such as pain and locking which resolved with partial meniscectomy. Paraesthesia in the anterior part of the knee was observed in 2 cases. (6.6%).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that fibrin clot augmentation is a good cost-effective modality of treatment for repairable meniscus tears to preserve the meniscus and decrease the point contact pressure on the condyles which may prevent the early occurrence of osteoarthritis.

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.

Factors affecting return to play and graft re-rupture after primary ACL reconstruction in professional footballers

PURPOSE

Modern ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) techniques have led to improved outcomes in professional footballers. The aim of this study was to identify and assess patient, surgical and post-operative factors that affected rates and time to return to play (RTP) as well as ACL re-rupture rates.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive ACL-R undertaken in professional footballers between 2005 and 2018.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and thirty-two knees in 215 professional footballers (17 bilateral) were included. 205 (88.9%) were male and average age at surgery was 23.3 ± 4.4 years. Two-hundred and twenty-two (96.1%) returned to professional football, with 209 (90.1%) returning to the same or higher Tegner level. Subgroup analysis revealed three factors that independently affected RTP rate: (1) Players under 25 years had a higher rate of RTP (99.3% vs 90.2%. p = 0.001); (2) a subsequent operation prior to RTP decreased RTP rate from 98.2 to 89.7% (p = 0.009).; (3) undergoing meniscal surgery at ACL-R decreased RTP rate (p = 0.002). The mean time to RTP from surgery was 10.5 ± 3.6 months. Factors found to increase RTP time included age under 25 (11.0 vs 9.7 months, p = 0.005), recurrent effusions (11.4 vs 10.2 months, p = 0.035), and medial meniscal repair at ACL-R compared to meniscectomy (12.5 vs 9.6 months, p = 0.022). The surgical technique varied over the study period in relation to graft type, femoral tunnel position and addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET). Overall, the re-rupture rate was 8.2% at 2 years. Patella tendon autograft in an anteromedial bundle femoral tunnel position with addition of LET has the lowest re-rupture rate (2.0%).

CONCLUSION

Primary ACL-R in professional footballers yields high rates of RTP (96.1%), with 90.1% at the same level or higher, at a mean 10.5 months. Patients under 25 years not only had a significantly higher RTP rate, but also had a lengthier period of rehabilitation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Evidence-based rationale for treatment of meniscal lesions in athletes

Meniscal injuries in elite athletes are a common cause of missed game time and even have the potential to be career shortening. In this patient group, care must be paid not only to the pathology, but also to a player's contract status, time in the season, specific demands of his/her sport and position on the field, and future consequences. Successful treatment requires the clinician to understand the player's goals and needs, communicate effectively between all stakeholders, and a have knowledge of the challenges posed by the different types of meniscal tear seen in this population. Paramount is the distinction between injuries to the medial and lateral meniscus. Deficiency of the lateral meniscus, as a result of a tear or a meniscectomy, leads to frequent early problems and inexorably to chondral degeneration thereby affecting an athlete's ability to perform. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to repair the majority of lateral meniscal tears. Medial meniscal tears pose a more challenging treatment dilemma, as the success of partial meniscectomy in achieving reproducible, early return to play must be balanced against the long-term degenerative consequences. Many meniscal tears are correctly treated non-operatively.Level of evidence V.

Outcomes and failure rates after revision meniscal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine the outcomes and failure rates for revision meniscus repairs in patients with re-tears after primary repair failure.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase with the terms "Meniscus," "Meniscal," "Revised," and "Revision." The search strategy was based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) protocol and included four articles (79 patients). The search criteria were limited to studies reporting outcomes and failure rates. The exclusion criteria included languages other than English, biomechanical studies, letters to editors, non-full text, review articles, meta-analysis, and case reports.

RESULTS

Four comparative studies with 79 patients (53 males, 26 females) with a mean age of 23.9 ± 6.4 years treated with a revision meniscus repair were included in the final analysis. Within this analysis, we found a failure rate of 25.3% (20 of 79 patients). Of these failed repairs, 30.95% (13 of 42) were of the medial meniscus, and 18.9% (7 of 37) were of the lateral meniscus. In the four articles, the postoperative Tegner sports activity score was found to be 6.1 ± 1.6 (range, 2 to 10). The post-operative Lysholm score was reported in three articles (45 patients). At a mean follow-up of 58.3 ± 23.9 months, the mean post-operative Lysholm score was 89.1 ± 7.6 (range, 38 to 100). The Coleman score for the included articles ranged between 52 and 59.

CONCLUSION

This analysis found that revision meniscus repairs in patients with re-tears after primary repair failure result in clinical outcomes similar to that of primary repairs.

Isolierter traumatischer Innenmeniskuswurzelabriss des jungen Erwachsenen

Es wird der Fall einer isolierten Wurzelverletzung des Innenmeniskushinterhorns bei einer 20-jährigen Patientin nach Sprung von einem 2,5 m hohen Turm geschildert. Die Therapie bestand in der arthroskopischen Refixation der Hinterhornwurzel mittels transtibialer Auszugsnaht. Postoperativ wurde eine Teilbelastung und Begrenzung der Beugung auf 90° für 6 Wochen verordnet. Nach 4 Monaten war die Patientin wieder sportlich voll belastbar mit nur marginalen funktionellen Defiziten im Rahmen einer Return-to-sport-Testung. Eine Kontroll-Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) zeigte eine gute Einheilung der Meniskushinterhornwurzel ohne Zeichen einer Extrusion. Isolierte traumatische Wurzelverletzungen der Menisken bei jungen Patient:innen sind selten, weisen allerdings eine gute und rasche Heilungstendenz auf, wenn diese frühzeitig erkannt und operativ adressiert werden.

Nineteen percent of meniscus repairs are being revised and failures frequently occur after the second postoperative year: a systematic review and meta-analysis with a minimum follow-up of 5 years

PURPOSE

Meniscus repair has gained increasing interest over the last two decades as loss of meniscus tissue predisposes to early onset knee arthritis. Although there are many reports of meniscus repair outcome in short-term studies, data on the long-term outcome of meniscus repair are still scarce. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the overall failure rate of meniscus repair with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Additionally, possible factors influencing meniscus repair outcome were assessed.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies of the last 20 years reporting on meniscus repair outcome with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. The study was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search terms used for this study were ([meniscus OR meniscal] AND repair). Titles and abstracts were evaluated by two authors independently. Using meta package of R (version 3.6.2), random-effect models were performed to pool failure rates. Subgroup analyses were performed and effect estimates in form of an odds ratio with 95% CIs were established.

RESULTS

In total, 12 studies with 864 patients were included. Degenerative tears were excluded in two studies and one study only included traumatic meniscus tears. Other studies did not state whether the cause of meniscus tear was degenerative or traumatic. Studies reporting meniscus repair outcome on root repairs, revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, discoid menisci or ramp lesions were excluded. Revision surgery was used as failure definition in all included studies. The overall failure rate of meniscal repair at a mean follow-up of 86 months was 19.1%. There was no significant difference in meniscus repair outcome when performed in combination with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction compared to isolated meniscus repair (18.7% vs. 28%; n.s.) or when performed on the lateral meniscus compared to the medial meniscus (19.5% vs. 24.4%; n.s.). There was no significant difference of meniscus repair outcome between vertical/longitudinal tears and bucket-handle tears (n.s.). Thirty-six percent of meniscus repair failures occur after the second postoperative year. The only significant finding was that inside-out repair results in a lower failure rate compared to all-inside repair (5.6% vs. 22.3%; p = 0.009) at 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The overall meniscus repair failure rate remains nineteen percent in long-term studies. The cause of failure is poorly documented, and it remains unclear whether failure of the meniscus repair itself or additional adjacent tears lead to revision surgery. Despite the given technical advantages of all-inside repair devices, this meta-analysis cannot demonstrate superior outcomes compared to inside-out or outside-in repair at 5 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

The Team Physician: Return to Play Considerations and Outcomes

Successful rehabilitation of sports-related orthopedic injuries remains a challenge for both orthopedic surgeons and their patients. Team physicians are tasked with the complex problem of minimizing time away from competition, while simultaneously mitigating the risk of reinjury. Varying levels of expectation and demand between recreational and competitive athletes coupled with the already complex nature of sports-related injuries present a multifactorial challenge for the even the most experienced physicians. In the realm of sports medicine, timing of return to sport has become a controversial yet ubiquitous criterion by which treatment outcomes are measured. While accelerated rehabilitation may be desired in many cases, surgeons must also recognize the identifiable risk factors for potential reinjury. With these principles in mind, we present a summary of the available literature on data pertaining to return to sport, with coverage of injuries commonly seen within an orthopedic sports medicine practice.

Medial Meniscus Repair in Major League Soccer Players Results in Decreased Performance Metrics for One Year and Shortened Career Longevity

Background

The rate of medial meniscus tear (MMT) in professional soccer players is high. There are no studies on objective performance metrics following medial meniscus repair in these athletes.

Purpose

Examine the impact of MMT treated with surgical repair on performance metrics and career longevity in Major League Soccer (MLS) players.

Methods

MLS players who sustained an MMT between 1993 and 2019 were identified via publicly available databases. These players were each matched to 2 uninjured controls by debut date, experience, position, race, ethnicity, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI). Demographic data and performance metrics were then collected for both groups. Matches, minutes, goals, assists, shots, shots on target, duels, and duel percentage won are collectively referred to as performance metrics. Statistical analysis compared demographic distributions and performance metrics between the MMT and control groups.

Results

Thirty-three MLS players who had undergone medial meniscus repair were identified and matched to 66 controls. All performance metrics decreased in the MMT group when compared to their controls in the first year after injury. This difference remained significant even when the performance metrics were normalized with respect to time, indicating that the injured players both played less and were not as productive. At 2 years after injury, performance metrics returned to pre-injury levels and were equivalent to those of the healthy controls. Career length was found to be significantly different between the two groups at 8.81 ± 3.9 years for the MMT group and 12.63 ± 3.51 years for the control group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

MLS players undergoing medial meniscus repair had decreased performance metrics in the first year after injury but returned to baseline levels of play at the second year after injury. Their careers were also shorter than those of their uninjured controls.

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.

Evaluation of Meniscal Tissue after Meniscal Repair Using Ultrahigh Field MRI

The study evaluates the meniscal tissue after primary meniscal suturing using 7-Tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging with T₂* mapping at 6 and 12 months after surgery to investigate the differences between repaired meniscal tissue and healthy meniscal tissue in the medial and lateral compartment. This prospective study included 11 patients (9m/2f) with a mean age of 30.6 years (standard deviation 9.0). Patients with a meniscal tear that was treated arthroscopically with meniscus suturing, using an all-inside technique, were included. All patients and seven healthy volunteers were imaged on a 7-T whole-body system. T2* mapping of the meniscus was applied on sagittal slices. Regions-of-interest were defined manually in the red and white zone of each medial and lateral meniscus to measure T2*-values. In the medial posterior and medial anterior horn similar T₂*-values were measured in the red and white zone at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Compared with the control group higher T₂*-values were found in the repaired medial meniscus. After 12-months T₂*-values decreased to normal values in the anterior horn and remained elevated in the posterior horn. In the red zone of the lateral posterior horn a significant decrease in the T₂*-values (from 8.2 milliseconds to 5.9 milliseconds) (p = 0.04), indicates successful repair; a tendency toward a decrease in the white zone between the 6 and 12 months follow-up was observed. In the red zone of the lateral anterior horn the T₂*-values decreased significantly during follow-up and in the white zone of the lateral anterior horn T₂*-values were comparable. In comparison to the control group higher T₂*-values were measured at 6-months; however, the T₂*-values showed comparable values in the repaired lateral meniscus after 12 months. The T2* mapping results of the current study indicated a better healing response of the red zone of the lateral posterior horn compared with the medial posterior horn.

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.

Good Surgical Outcomes After Concomitant Repair of Double Radial Tears of the Lateral Meniscus and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

To describe double radial tears of the lateral meniscus (LM), report early clinical treatment outcomes, and determine reoperation and failure rates.

Methods

Twenty-one (N = 21) consecutive cases of arthroscopic-treated lateral meniscus double radial tears treated between 2012 and 2018 were reviewed, including 15 males (71.4%) and 6 females (28.6%). Meniscus repairs were all performed at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Patients with associated fractures or prior surgeries were excluded. Concomitant injuries were reported, as were preinjury and postoperative Tegner scores, preoperative and postoperative visual analogue pain scale (VAS) scores, and postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective scores. Reoperation and failure rates were documented.

Results

Twenty-one (N = 21) tears were located in the posterior horn of the meniscus near the root attachment; 15 (71.4%) underwent all-inside repair, 4 (19.0%) underwent transtibial pull-through repair, 1 (4.8%) was partially debrided, and 1 (4.8%) was left untreated. Twenty-one tears (N = 21) were in the body of the meniscus; 7 (33.3%) were repaired, 7 (33.3%) were partially debrided, and 7 (33.3%) were left untreated. Thirteen patients (62%) had associated medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries. Mean follow-up was 2.6 years. VAS at rest and with activity improved by 2.1 points (P < .001) and 3.1 points (P = .017) after surgery. The mean postoperative Tegner activity score was 6.4, and the mean IKDC score was 83.2 at final follow-up. Reoperation was required in 5 patients (23.8%), and the surgical treatment failed in 1 patient (4.7%).

Conclusions

Double radial tears of the LM are uncommon injuries that occur in the setting of ACL tears, usually combined with MCL injury. The variety of surgical treatment techniques have a low failure rate at short-term follow-up. Patients tend to have good clinical outcomes with improvement in pain and overall function after surgically treating these injuries with simultaneous ACL reconstruction.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic study, case series

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.

An Approach to Chronic and Displaced Bucket Handle Meniscal Tear-Assessment, Repair (Push-and-Pull Technique), or Salvage

Meniscal repairs are preferred to meniscectomies to preserve meniscal function and mitigate the risk of degeneration. However, repair of a chronic and displaced bucket handle tear of the meniscus can be technically challenging. We introduce a systematic method for assessment, reduction, repair, or salvage in this situation with an aim of reducing operating time and improving the chance of a favorable outcome. This technique describes repair of a bucket handle tear on the medial meniscus with displacement into the intercondylar notch. An arthroscopic probe is used for reduction and suture tension (push-and-pull technique) when using an all-inside suture device (FAST-FIX 360 repair system; Smith & Nephew) on the middle and posterior part of the tear. The anterior part of the tear is repaired with an outside-in method. If reduction is not possible, then a salvage reduction and hybrid repair is carried out instead. Postoperatively, patients will be nonweight-bearing on the operated limb, and range of motion restricted from 0 to 90° for 6 weeks, with the aim of resuming running by 6 months.

Return-to-Play and Rehabilitation Protocols Following Isolated Meniscal Repair-A Systematic Review

Purpose

To systematically review the literature and assess the reported rehabilitation protocols, return-to-play guidelines, and reported rates of return-to-play after meniscal repair.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies on meniscal repair. Studies were included if return-to-play data and/or rehabilitation protocols were reported. The rate and timing of return-to-play was assessed. The rehabilitation protocols were documented, in addition to when to start range of motion (ROM), full ROM, partial weight-bearing (WB), and full WB.

Results

Overall, 88 studies met our inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies, including 507 patients, cited a range of 71.2% to 100% of return-to-play, with 53.9% to 92.6% returning to the same/greater level, ranging between 3.3 and 10 months. There was considerable variability in the reported rehabilitation protocols, but the most frequently reported time to begin ROM exercises was within the first week (78.9%) and full ROM at 6 weeks (33.3%). Partial WB was typically begun during the first week (61.0%), and full WB between the fourth and sixth week (65.6%) postoperatively. Following surgery, time elapsed was the most commonly cited criteria for return-to-play (97.0%), with 6 months being the most common time point applied (46.9%). No study advised against returning to competitive or contact sports after meniscal repair.

Conclusions

In conclusion, there was a high rate of return-to-play following meniscal repair, with 60% of patients returning to the same level of play. However, there was considerable diversity in the reported rehabilitation protocols and insufficient reporting on return-to-play criteria in the literature. This demonstrates the need for further research and formulation of an evidence-based consensus statement for this patient population.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Return to Play After Isolated Meniscal Repairs in Athletes: A Systematic Review

Background:

Meniscal tears are a common knee injury. Isolated meniscal tears are less common; however, unaddressed tears can be troublesome, particularly for athletes. There is currently a lack of data in the literature on athletes returning to play after isolated meniscal repair.

Purpose:

To evaluate the return to play rate and time to return to play for athletes with isolated meniscal injuries.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that reported the time and the rate of return to play in athletes after repair of isolated meniscal tears. Studies were excluded if there was a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, if there was a meniscectomy instead of a meniscal repair, or if the study was a systematic review. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed by 2 examiners.

Results:

Overall, 21 studies were included in this review. There were 355 athletes (358 knees) with a mean age of 22.5 years (range, 9-68 years). A sex breakdown was noted in 16 of the 21 (76.2%) studies with 224 men and 71 women. The specific repair technique was described in 259 (72.3%) knees. Of the total knees, 109 (30.4%) had an open repair, 128 (35.8%) had an inside-out arthroscopic technique repair, and 22 (6.1%) had an all-inside arthroscopic technique repair. Complications were addressed in 11 studies, with 13 out of 155 (8.4%) patients across the 11 articles having a postoperative complication. Of the total 355 patients, 295 (83.1%) returned to play, and 17 of these 21 (81.0%) articles reported the time it took for athletes to return to play, with a mean return of 8.7 months.

Conclusion:

The study results indicate that return to play rates after isolated meniscal repair are high, with an overall return to play rate of 83.1% and a mean return to play time of 8.7 months. However, the limited number of studies, particularly ones with larger patient numbers, highlights the need for further investigation regarding isolated meniscal repair in athletes.

Delayed or neglected meniscus tear repair and meniscectomy in addition to ACL reconstruction have similar clinical outcome

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of meniscus repair and meniscus resection with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in patients with ACL rupture and neglected or delayed medial meniscus tears.

METHODS

Thirty patients with ACL ruptures and unstable vertical longitudinal medial meniscus tears were included. Patients were divided into two groups. Group I included 15 patients who underwent meniscal repair and Group II included 15 patients who underwent meniscectomy. The knee range of motion, McMurray test, Lachman test, pivot shift test, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Questionnaire, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee score, and Tegner activity (TA) scale were used to assess all patients.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 3.6 (0.5-6.5) years. Median age was 28 (16-36) years. Fourteen patients (93.3%) in Group I and six patients (40%) in Group II returned to their preinjury sport activity level (P = .007). Median maximum knee flexion was 132° (121°-140°) in Group I and 134° (121°-139°) in Group II (n.s.). All patients had full knee extension and negative McMurray test results. Lachman and pivot shift test results were similar between groups. The median IKDC Questionnaire score was 99 (86-100) in Group I and 93 (70-100) in Group II (P = .016). The difference in Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, HSS knee, and TA scale score between groups were not significant.

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcomes of patients that underwent meniscus repair were better than those that underwent meniscus resection with concurrent ACL reconstruction. The technically complicated and costly meniscus repair may achieve better clinical outcomes than meniscectomy when treating a neglected or delayed meniscal tear with a concurrent ACL tear.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Migration of a Meniscal Repair Implant Mimicking Meniscal Injury

Complications after arthroscopic meniscal suture repair have been reported. Migration of a meniscal repair implant mimicking meniscal injury is rare. A 28-year-old female had undergone Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction at another hospital 12 years ago . The remaining instability after ACL reconstruction resulted in medial meniscal damage, wear and narrowing in the posterior third. The H-fix that was used in the meniscal repair became detached, exposing the inside of the knee joint. Meniscal repair is a successful procedure in conjunction with ACL reconstruction. However, when knee instability after ACL reconstruction remains, the choice of meniscal repair implants may lead to potential complications even after long-term clinical follow-up.

Patient Outcomes After Horizontal Cleavage Tear Repair: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze the clinical outcomes and survivorship of meniscal horizontal cleavage tear (HCT) repairs with hopes of guiding future treatment decisions.

METHODS

Standard systematic review methodology was used. A comprehensive search of PubMed was conducted on June 1, 2019. The inclusion criteria were articles that were published in English, involved human subjects, and reported on at least 1 outcome after repair of HCTs. The exclusion criteria included technique guides and reviews, studies without full text available, and studies with HCT outcomes not separated from other repair groups. Effect heterogeneity was determined using the I² measure. Forest plots were created in addition to a random-effects model to show the results.

RESULTS

The systematic review yielded 19 studies evaluating 289 knees in a total of 273 patients. At most recent follow-up, there was a high probability of return to sport (93.1% [67 of 72]). Overall, 74% of patients (67 of 90) were symptom free at last follow-up, and 80% expressed satisfaction with their overall result (80 of 100). The most frequently reported subjective outcome was the Lysholm score, which improved from a preoperative study range of 48 to 79 (I² = 20.7%, P = .283) to a postoperative study range of 56 to 99 (I² = 49%, P = .081). The next most commonly reported was the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, which improved from a preoperative study range of 16 to 49 (I² = 47.7%, P = .125) to a postoperative study range of 72 to 95 (I² = 0%, P = .660). An overall 11.7% reported risk of reoperation was found, with most cases involving revision meniscectomy. Rates of complications beyond fixation failure were overall very low, with infrequent reports of septic arthritis and transitory dysesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- to intermediate-term results of repair of HCTs are comparable to prior studies. Survivorship is comparable to repairs of other types of meniscal tears with high rates of return to sport and low complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Meniscal Tears: Current Understanding, Diagnosis, and Management

From once being labelled as a functionless remain of leg muscle, extensive scientific investigations in recent decades have described the meniscus as one of the most crucial structures of the knee. The incidence of meniscal injuries is on the rise and can be attributed to the increased participation of youth in sporting activities. MRI continues to be the imaging modality of choice, and surgical management is the mainstay of treatment for meniscal tears. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is currently the most performed orthopedic procedure around the globe. However, recent studies have conclusively shown that outcomes after an APM are no better than the outcomes after a sham/placebo surgery. Meniscal repair is now being touted as a viable and effective alternative. Meniscal repair aims to achieve meniscal healing while completely avoiding the adverse effects of partial meniscectomy. Meniscal repairs have grown in popularity over the past three decades and have proved to be a much more efficient alternative to partial meniscectomy. It is now increasingly recommended to attempt meniscal repair in all repairable tears, especially in young and physically active patients. Partial Meniscal implants have also shown excellent outcomes in long-term studies, but its efficacy in acute settings still requires further research. Research performed on various techniques of meniscal regeneration looks promising, and regenerative medicine appears to be the way forward. This review aims to critically discuss the current understanding of the meniscus, its role in biomechanics of the knee joint, and the current methods used to diagnose and manage meniscal tears.

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.

Management of traumatic meniscus tears: the 2019 ESSKA meniscus consensus

PURPOSE

The importance of meniscus integrity in the prevention of early osteoarthritis is well known, and preservation is accepted as the primary goal. The purpose of the ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) European consensus on traumatic meniscus tears was to provide recommendations for the treatment of meniscus tears based on both scientific evidence and the clinical experience of knee experts.

METHODS

Three groups of surgeons and scientists elaborated and ratified the so-called formal consensus process to define the recommendations for the management of traumatic meniscus tears. A traumatic meniscus tear was defined as a tear with an acute onset of symptoms caused by a sufficient trauma. The expert groups included a steering group of eight European surgeons and scientists, a rating group of another nineteen European surgeons, and a peer review group. The steering group prepared twenty-seven question and answer sets based on the scientific literature. The quality of the answers received grades of A (a high level of scientific support), B (scientific presumption), C (a low level of scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question and answer sets were then submitted to and evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 (= totally inappropriate) to 9 (= totally appropriate) points. Thereafter, the comments of the members of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the finalized question and answer sets were submitted for final review by the peer review group composed of representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies. Eighteen representatives replied.

RESULTS

The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears. Of the 27 questions, only one question received a grade of A (a high level of scientific support), and another received a grade of B (scientific presumption). The remaining questions received grades of C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.2 (95% confidence interval 8.1-8.4). A general agreement that MRI should be performed on a systematic basis was not achieved. However, MRI was recommended when arthroscopy would be considered to identify concomitant pathologies. In this case, the indication for MRI should be determined by a musculoskeletal specialist. Based on our data, stable left in situ lateral meniscus tears appear to show a better prognosis than medial tears. When repair is required, surgery should be performed as early as possible. Evidence that biological enhancement such as needling or the application of platelet-rich plasma would improve healing was not identified. Preservation of the meniscus should be considered as the first line of treatment because of an inferior clinical and radiological long-term outcome after partial meniscectomy compared to meniscus repair.

DISCUSSION

The consensus was generated to present the best possible recommendations for the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears and provides some groundwork for a clinical decision-making process regarding the treatment of meniscus tears. Preservation of the meniscus should be the first line of treatment when possible, because the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes are worse after partial meniscectomy than after meniscus preservation. The consensus clearly states that numerous meniscus tears that were considered irreparable should be repaired, e.g., older tears, tears in obese patients, long tears, etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Inside-Out Bucket-Handle Meniscus Repair With a Single-Handed Self-Advancing Zone-Specific Meniscus Repair Device

Meniscus tears are among the most common knee injuries in the general population and often are treated arthroscopically with a meniscus repair. Of the various meniscus repair techniques available, the inside-out meniscus tear is considered the gold standard due to its versatility and good clinical outcomes. The purpose of this Technical Note and accompanying video is to describe an inside-out bucket-handle meniscus repair using a single handed, self-advancing meniscus repair device with an interchangeable zone-specific multicannula system to decrease the technical difficulty and operative time of the repair.

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

PURPOSE

To identify factors that affect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and failure rates after arthroscopic meniscal repair.

METHODS

Embase, Embase Classic, and MEDLINE were searched on August 7, 2015, December 23, 2016, and March 11, 2018, for factors associated with PROMs and failure rates after arthroscopic meniscal repair. We excluded studies that (1) were non-English language, (2) did not use human patients, (3) were nonclinical, (4) did not analyze for factors that predicted PROMs or failure rates, and (5) were below Level IV evidence. Studies were graded into higher and lower quality using the Downs and Black scale.

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles met our criteria, and 32 were graded. We identified 16 articles as higher quality. Among higher-quality studies, factors that significantly predicted reduced failure rates were concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) (n = 6) and reduced tear complexity (n = 4). Factors that did not significantly impact failure rates were side of repair (n = 8), sex (n = 7), time from injury to surgery (n = 7), age (n = 7), rim width (n = 6), and tear length (n = 5). Factors predicting better PROMs were time from injury to surgery of less than 3 months (n = 1), Outerbridge scores below grade 3 or 4 (n = 2), and reduced varus alignment (n = 2). Factors that did not significantly impact PROMs were equipment used (n = 3) and concurrent ACLR (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Factors affecting failure rates and PROMs after arthroscopic meniscal repair were identified. However, more and higher-quality studies supported concurrent ACLR and less complex tears as predictors of lower failure rates. PROMs were negatively affected by a longer time from injury to surgery, higher Outerbridge scores, and greater varus alignment before surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.

Arthroscopic Repair of Double Radial Tears of the Lateral Meniscus

Double radial tears of the lateral meniscus are rare injuries that typically occur in the setting of an acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Full-thickness radial tears of the meniscus body and root render the meniscus nonfunctional from a loss of hoop stress resistance. Repair of these tears can normalize contact pressures in the lateral compartment and delay arthritic changes. We describe our technique for repairing a lateral meniscus body radial tear and concomitant posterior root tear, via inside-out suture repair and transtibial suture repair, respectively. This investigation was performed at Mayo Clinic.

High short-term return to sports rate despite an ongoing healing process after acute meniscus repair in young athletes

PURPOSE

Acute meniscus repair in young athletes is always a challenge due to the long rehabilitation process and time to return to sport (RTS). The purpose was to investigate signal alterations in short-term follow-up after acute meniscus repair on specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan sequences. It was hypothesized that (1) MRI signal changes over the first postoperative healing phase and represent a continuous healing process and (2) meniscus healing properties correlates with clinical outcomes and RTS.

METHODS

Young athletes with traumatic meniscus lesion and arthroscopic meniscus repair within 6 weeks and available preoperative MRI were enrolled. Clinical examination, outcome scores (IKDC, KOOS, Lysholm Score, Tegner activity score) and RTS were surveyed preoperatively and 6 and 12 weeks and 6 months after surgery. Radiological follow-up examinations were performed 2, 4, 6, 12 weeks and 6 months after operation using a 3T-MRI. Evaluation was based on ISAKOS meniscus classification system, meniscus healing were classified according to Henning's criteria.

RESULTS

At final follow-up (FU) 30 patients (28 month, 2 week) with a total of 35 meniscus tears (19 medial, 16 lateral) were included. Clinical scores improved significantly after surgery: IKDC Score (preOP: 39.4 ± 18.5, final FU: 78.8 ± 15.3) KOOS (preOP: 45.7 ± 22.1, final FU: 82.7 ± 12.5) and Lysholm Score (preOP: 42.8 ± 23.7, final FU: 84.4 ± 13.8) (p < 0.01). Tegner activity score showed a steadily increase to 4 (range 3-9) at 6 months but did not reached the pre-injury level of 6 (range 3-9). RTS rate was 100% whereof 44.8% reached their pre-injury level. MRI examination revealed a continuous healing process and menisci were classified as 55.9% healed, 35.3% partially healed and 8.8% non-healed at final FU.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that MRI signal alterations of the meniscus steadily occur within the first 6 months postoperatively. MRI reveals an ongoing healing process at final FU that have to be carefully considered when RTS is discussed with high demanding patients. However, young athletes provide good clinical results and RTS rate even though MRI alterations are still present.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, prospective case series, Level IV.

3D-MRI combined with signal-to-noise ratio measurement can improve the diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity in evaluating meniscal healing status after meniscal repair

PURPOSE

This study compared the diagnostic accuracy of second-look arthroscopy, clinical assessment, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in evaluating meniscal healing following repair. To explore the application of 3D-MRI sequences with signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurements and the analysis of sensitivity and accuracy in evaluating meniscal healing status after meniscal repair.

METHODS

This study included 75 patients (75 menisci; mean age, 25.4 ± 6.6 years) who underwent arthroscopic meniscal repair (medial menisci, 45; and lateral menisci, 29). Follow-up evaluation included clinical assessment, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and second-look arthroscopy (mean follow-up, 10.2 ± 3.4 months). The criteria defined for unhealed menisci were: on arthroscopy, presence of cleft; on clinical assessment, presence of joint-line tenderness, swelling, locking, or positive McMurray test; on MRI, grade III signal intensity at the site of repair. Finally, the SNR on 3D-MRI of the healed and the unhealed groups were compared.

RESULTS

On second-look arthroscopy, 68 (90.7%) menisci were found to be completely healed. With the arthroscopic healing rate as the standard, the clinical healing rate was 69.3% (63 menisci) [sensitivity, 85.7%; specificity, 75.0%; accuracy, 76.0%; positive predictive value (PPV), 26.1%; negative predictive value (NPV), 98.1%]. Similarly, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV, respectively, for MRI in four sequences were as follows: 2D-T2W-Sag: 71.4, 79.4, 78.7, 26.3, and 96.4%; 2D-T2W-Cor: 71.4, 82.4, 81.3, 29.4, and 96.6%; 3D-PDW-Sag: 100.0, 50.0, 54.7, 17.1, and 100.0%; 3D-PDW-Cor: 100.0, 58.8, 62.7, 20.0, and 100.0%. The mean SNRs of the healed group (3D-PDW-Sag, 66.7 ± 11.9; 3D-PDW-Cor, 63.9 ± 12.4) were significantly lesser than that of the unhealed group (3D-PDW-Sag, 89.2 ± 9.6; 3D-PDW-Cor, 82.2 ± 18.5) (P < 0.05). Identifying grade 3 meniscal damage on 3D-PDW images prior to applying the different SNR cut-off points revealed SNR values 80 in the sagittal plane and 70 in the coronal plane as having better diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity. The clinical relevance of the study was that 3D-MRI combined with SNR measurement may be a noninvasive and accurate method of assessment clinically, and a reliable alternative to second-look arthroscopy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Return to Sports After Athletes Undergo Meniscal Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the time to and rate of the return to sports (RTS) after meniscal surgery and to compare these values among the different types of meniscal surgeries.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched. Studies that met the following criteria were included: (1) English article, (2) full-text available, (3) study on athletes, and (4) primary outcome is RTS after meniscal surgery, such as meniscectomy, meniscal repair, and meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT).

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included in the final analysis. Most players returned to the preinjury activity level from 7 to 9 weeks after partial meniscectomy. After meniscal repair, 81% to 88.9% of athletes returned to sports. The time to RTS after isolated meniscal repair was on average 5.6 months, and the time to RTS was longer for athletes who required concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). After MAT, 67% to 85.7% of athletes returned to sports, and the time to RTS ranged from 7.6 to 16.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The shortest time to RTS and the highest RTS rate were observed after partial meniscectomy. The time to RTS was shorter, and the RTS rate was higher after meniscal repair than after MAT. Concurrent procedures such as ACLR prolonged the time to RTS, but it had no effect on the RTS rate and the level of sports activity at the time of RTS.

What are the factors to affect outcome and healing of meniscus bucket handle tears?

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to identify patient, meniscus rupture and surgical characteristics that influence the outcome and clinical healing following operative repair of bucket handle tears.

METHODS

Between 02/2006 and 10/2012, a total of 38 patients (14 women, 24 men) with bucket handle tears underwent surgical meniscus repair. There were 27 isolated repairs and 11 with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) replacement. Patients were analyzed on an average of 44.4 months (range 15-96 months) after surgery by the use of standardized subjective scoring instruments [Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Tegner Activity Scale (TAS)]. To identify factors affecting the outcome and suture survival, patient-specific, trauma-specific as well as meniscus- and surgery-specific factors were collected. Patients were divided in two groups with healed menisci (group 1) and re-rupture subjects (group 2). Meniscus re-rupture was defined as a clinical failure.

RESULTS

There were 25 patients with healed menisci and 13 (34.2%) that sustained re-rupture and underwent either partial meniscectomy (n = 8) or re-suture (n = 5). Group 1 achieved slightly higher outcome compared to group 2 [Lysholm: 87.8 vs. 84.3 (p = 0.35), IKDC: 86.9 vs. 85.7 (p = 0.67), KOOS: 91.3 vs. 90.5 (p = 0.74)]. TAS was better for group 2 [5.9 vs. 6.8 (p = 0.36)]. Strong impact to result in a significantly increased outcome was identified for higher age, subjective knee joint stability, high preoperative Lysholm Score, short trauma-to-repair time, previous ACL reconstruction and a smaller number of sutures to fulfill meniscus repair. Lower patient age, male gender and higher activity level had the strongest impact to provoke re-rupture.

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcome after meniscus bucket handle suture is satisfying. Re-rupture rate among this collective was 34.2%. Clear risk factors were identified for diminished clinical healing and outcome.

Similar failure rate in immediate post-operative weight bearing versus protected weight bearing following meniscal repair on peripheral, vertical meniscal tears

PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS

Post-operative weight bearing after meniscal repair is a point of debate among physicians. This study sought to evaluate whether patients adhering to an immediate WBAT rehabilitation programme have a higher failure rate compared to those adhering to a more traditional, protected, NWB status following meniscal repair. The null hypothesis was that there would be no difference in failure between the two groups.

METHODS

A retrospective review of meniscal repair patients greater than 5 years from surgery was performed for patients receiving meniscal repair treatment. Patients were categorized by post-surgical weight-bearing status, either NWB or WBAT, and then analysed for failure of repair. Failure was defined as re-operation on the torn meniscus. The study controlled for variables including age at surgery, sex, height, weight, and BMI, classification of tear type, acuity of the tear, repair location (medial or lateral), repair location within the meniscus, repair technique, and concomitant procedures.

RESULTS

Re-operations were performed in 61 of 157 patients [38.9%]. There was no difference between weight-bearing groups for failure of meniscus repair (n.s.). The tears were acute vertical tears located in the posterior horn and body. For the 61 patients with re-operation, the average time to re-operation was 2.2 years with 10 [16%] > 5 years from surgery, 17 [28%] 2-5 years from surgery, and 34 [56%] < 2 years from surgery. In isolated meniscal repair patients (n = 62), there was no difference between weight-bearing groups for rate of re-operation (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

Weight bearing as tolerated after meniscal repair for peripheral, vertical tears does not result in a higher failure rate than traditional, non-weight bearing over a five-year follow-up period. The clinical relevance is that, based on these data, it may be appropriate to allow weight bearing as tolerated following meniscal repair of peripheral, vertical tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective cohort study, Level III.