Suture Hook Versus All-Inside Repair for Longitudinal Tears of the Posterior Horn of the Medial Meniscus Concomitant to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Matched-Pair Analysis From the SANTI Study Group

Inside-Out Repair of Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesions in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background

Medial meniscal ramp lesions are disruptions at the meniscocapsular junction and/or meniscotibial attachment of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus, and occur in up to 42% of all acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears1,3-5. Ramp lesions are frequently missed because of the limited diagnostic sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), physical examination, and standard anterior compartment arthroscopic exploration4,6,7. Arthroscopic evaluation of ramp lesions often requires a modified Gillquist maneuver and/or a posteromedial accessory portal for adequate assessment of the posteromedial "blind spot."4,8-10 Clinically, ramp lesions are associated with increased preoperative anterior knee instability, which may increase the risk of ACL graft failure if left untreated6,13. Although long-term comparative data on ramp-repair techniques are limited, proper arthroscopic assessment and treatment is recommended for all patients with ramp lesions at the time of ACL reconstruction (ACLR)1-5. In the present video article, we demonstrate a systematic approach for the identification and assessment of ramp lesions and describe a mini-open inside-out arthroscopically assisted repair technique for unstable ramp lesions at the time of ACLR.

Description

(1) The patient is placed in the supine position, and a contralateral leg holder is utilized to create more working room on the medial side. (2) Standard diagnostic arthroscopy is performed through anteromedial and anterolateral portals. (3) Next, with the arthroscope in the anterolateral portal, the scope is advanced through the intercondylar notch with the knee in 30° of flexion in order to inspect the posterior horn of the medial meniscus. Probing is directed both over the superior aspect of the posterior horn to assess for tears, separation, and/or displacement of the meniscocapsular junction, and under the inferior aspect of the posterior horn to assess the integrity of the meniscotibial attachment. (4) After confirmation of a ramp tear, an open dissection is carried out through the sartorial fascia, with blunt dissection performed anterior to the medial gastrocnemius and above the semimembranosus to create the posteromedial surgical site. (5) A suture-shuttling device is utilized, and the corresponding cannula is placed into the anterolateral portal and directed toward the tear under arthroscopic visualization from the anteromedial portal. (6) Next, the first needle is passed through the meniscus, and the second is delivered through the adjacent capsule to create a vertical or oblique suture pattern. The needles are retrieved from the posteromedial surgical site and promptly cut, and the sutures are tied. (7) Multiple sutures, both above (femoral) and below (tibial) the meniscus, are placed 3 to 5 mm apart in a similar fashion. (8) On completion of the repair, the meniscocapsular junction is probed in order to confirm adequate stability with minimal translation of the medial meniscus.

Alternatives

In the setting of an ACL tear, surgical options for concomitant repair of an unstable ramp lesion include all-inside, inside-out, or hybrid techniques (i.e., outside-in, inside-in, and/or all-inside).

Rationale

Repair of ramp lesions using an inside-out technique restores preoperative excessive knee instability, which may decrease the risk of ACL graft failure. In addition, an inside-out ramp repair has a reported low secondary meniscectomy rate (2%), offers flexibility regarding the number and placement of the sutures, and creates a potentially stronger repair; however, this procedure is more technically challenging compared with other repair techniques6,10. All-inside ramp repairs have been reported to have higher secondary meniscectomy rates, ranging from 11% to 31%, because of the inability to repair the meniscotibial ligament from the anterior portals13,14. Suture hook repair using a posteromedial portal is becoming more popular and reportedly has a significantly lower secondary meniscectomy rate compared with all-inside techniques (19% compared with 30.6%)15.

Expected Outcomes

At a minimum of 2 years of follow-up, DePhillipo et al. reported similar clinical outcomes and return to sports for patients who underwent combined ACLR plus inside-out repair of ramp lesions (n = 50) compared with a matched cohort who underwent isolated ACLR (n = 50). Although the ACLR plus ramp lesion repair group had had significantly greater preoperative knee instability compared with the isolated ACLR group, there was no difference in postoperative instability between groups at an average of 2.8 years (range, 2 to 8 years) of follow-up6.

Important Tips

The exterior posteromedial incision should be facilitated by inside-out transillumination of the medial compartment and by palpation using an intra-articular probe at the medial aspect of the joint in order to avoid saphenous vein injury10.Two-thirds of the posteromedial incision should be distal to the joint line, with one-third proximal, because the suture needles often angle downwards as they exit the capsule10.The pes anserinus tendons should be retracted during the posteromedial dissection in order to avoid injury to the saphenous nerve (which lies posteromedial to the tendons)10.70° to 90° of flexion relaxes the hamstring and gastrocnemius, which improves visualization and aids in retrieval of the suture needles as they exit the posterior capsule10.Entering the anterolateral portal with the suture-delivery device decreases the risk of neurovascular damage and optimizes the direction of the needle10.After placement of the first needle, keep slight tension on the first suture to avoid inadvertent suture damage during advancement of the second needle10.Recent reports have suggested that ramp lesions can occur in isolation without ACL injury or accompanying isolated or combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) tears. Do not forget to assess for ramp lesions in these scenarios16.

Acronyms

ACL = anterior cruciate ligamentPCL = posterior cruciate ligamentMMBH = medial meniscus bucket-handleMRI = magnetic resonance imagingMFC = medial femoral condyleMTP = medial tibial plateauPMC = posteromedial capsuleMM = medial meniscusAT = adductor tuberclesMCL = superficial medial collateral ligamentSM = semimembranosusMGT = medial head of gastrocnemius tendonACLR = anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionPROMs = patient-reported outcome measuresMTL = meniscotibial ligament.

Arthroscopic Primary Repair of Proximal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears Using a Continuous Bundle Suture Technique With Simplified Suture Passing

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is a common knee sports injury, with proximal ACL tears accounting for most cases. Arthroscopic ACL preservation has shown great potential in repairing ACL anatomic and biological function, with less tissue damage and slightly higher failure rates. Although many techniques for repairing the ACL have been developed, there are still many problems with the existing technology, such as the cumbersome operation of the traditional hook and needle breakage of the Scorpion suture passer (Arthrex). Herein, to further improve operational convenience and reliability, we developed a continuous bundle suture technique for primary repair of proximal ACL tears with suture anchor fixation. This technique aims to achieve continuous suturing with no additional auxiliary suture for guiding suturing by using a passer as a pusher in the suture hook to push out the suture loaded in the tip of the hook after the hook passes through the ligament. This technique takes advantage of the economics of the suture hook and the convenience of the Scorpion suture passer, allowing for flexible application of the suture hook to conveniently achieve anteromedial and posterolateral bundle repair for patients with proximal ACL tears.

Secondary restraints in ACL reconstruction: State-of-the-art

At-risk patients continue to experience a high likelihood of graft rupture after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). This narrative review seeks to provide the reader with an evidence-based synopsis of state-of-the-art concepts related to secondary restraint lesions, and how addressing them surgically might result in improved outcomes of ACLR.

Secondary Meniscectomy Rates and Risk Factors for Failed Repair of Ramp Lesions Performed at the Time of Primary ACL Reconstruction: An Analysis of 1037 Patients From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating secondary meniscectomy rates and risk factors for failure of ramp repair are sparse and limited by small numbers and heterogeneity.

PURPOSES/HYPOTHESIS

The purposes were to determine the secondary meniscectomy rate for failure of ramp repair performed using a posteromedial portal suture hook at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and to identify risk factors for secondary meniscectomy. It was hypothesized that patients who underwent ACLR combined with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP) would experience significantly lower rates of secondary meniscectomy compared with those undergoing isolated ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary ACLR and ramp repair between 2013 and 2020 were included in the study. Final follow-up for each patient was defined by his or her last appointment recorded in a prospective database (with a study end date of March 2023). The database and medical records were used to determine whether patients had undergone secondary meniscectomy for failure of ramp repair. Survivorship of ramp repair (using secondary meniscectomy as an endpoint) was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was used to investigate possible risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 1037 patients were included in the study. The secondary meniscectomy rate after ramp repair was 7.7% at a mean final follow-up of 72.4 months. Patients without combined ACLR + LEAP were >2-fold more likely to undergo a secondary medial meniscectomy compared with those with combined ACLR + LEAP (hazard ratio, 2.455; 95% CI, 1.457-4.135; P = .0007). Age, sex, preoperative Tegner score, and time between injury and surgery were not significant risk factors for failure.

CONCLUSION

The rate of secondary meniscectomy after ramp repair performed through a posteromedial portal at the time of primary ACLR was low. Patients who underwent isolated ACLR (rather than ACLR + LEAP) were >2-fold more likely to undergo a secondary medial meniscectomy for failure of ramp repair. Additional risk factors for failure of ramp repair were not identified.

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis and Anterolateral Procedures

The treatment of rotational instability has been an intriguing challenge since the era of modern anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery. Lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) have emerged as a solution to this problem, particularly in high-risk populations. Several studies have shown significant benefits of combining LEAPs with ACL reconstruction, including reduced graft failure rates, improved knee stability, improved rotational stability, and higher return-to-play rates. These findings have led to an in-depth evaluation of LEAPs as lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterolateral ligament reconstruction and their potential role in improving outcomes after ACL reconstruction.

How to repair medial meniscal ramp lesions: A systematic review of surgical techniques

Purpose

to provide a comprehensive overview of all the surgical techniques published in the literature for repairing meniscal ramp lesions focusing on the technical aspects and the pros and cons of every procedure. Such lesions can be managed using various approaches, each of this with its specific advantages and disadvantages.

Methods

Pubmed Central, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were systematically reviewed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for studies on surgical techniques for repairing meniscal ramp lesions through May 2023. Overall, 32 articles matched the selection criteria and were included in the study.

Results

Debridement alone may be sufficient for small stable meniscal ramp lesions but, for tears in the menisco-capsular junction that affect the stability of the medial meniscus, it seems reasonable to repair it, even though the clinical results available in literature are contrasting. All-inside sutures through anterior portals seems to be an effective solution for meniscal ramp lesions with MTL tears. All-inside sutures through posteromedial portals are particularly useful for large meniscal ramp lesions, in which an inside-out suture can also be performed.

Conclusion

Meniscal ramp lesions can be managed using various approaches, each of this with its specific advantages and disadvantages. Further research is required to determine the optimal technique that can be considered as the gold standard and can provide the better results.

Level of Evidence

Level III, systematic review.

High failure rate after medial meniscus bucket handle tears repair in the stable knee

BACKGROUND

It is nowadays recommended to "Save the meniscus". This paradigm is based on the affirmation that an extended meniscectomy exposes to the risk of long-term secondary osteoarthritis and the global failure rate of a longitudinal tear repair remains low, whether it is the medial or lateral meniscus, with or without anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, each kind of lesion has to be studied separate.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to focus on a homogeneous population of isolated repair of the bucket handle tear (BHT) of the medial meniscus (MM) in patients with stable knees to evaluate failure rate at a minimum of three years of follow-up. The secondary objectives were to evaluate any risk factors or protective factors of failure, clinical outcomes, and secondary amount of meniscectomy in failure cases compared to the amount of meniscus fixed in the first surgery.

METHODS

All patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of a BHT of the MM situated in the red-on-red or red-on white (RW) zone on a stable knee between January 2010 and December 2018 were evaluated retrospectively. Failure was defined as a need for reoperation for recurrence of meniscal symptoms (pain, locking) on the medial side with per-operative confirmation of the absence of healing. The following parameters were studied: demographics (age, gender, BMI), time from injury to surgery, clinical scores (Tegner, Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC]), surgical findings (extent and zone of the tear), surgical management (number and type of suture).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were included. The mean follow-up was 77.2±24.4 [36-141] months. Twenty-seven (69%) failures were recorded. In 56% (15/27) of the reoperations, the meniscectomy amount was smaller than what it would have been done in the first surgery. All clinical scores improved significantly from pre- to post-operatively; all patients met minimal clinically important differences for all the scores. No risk factors were found significant in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Repairing an isolated BHT of the MM is associated with a high failure rate. Despite the failure, we observed that the meniscectomy area was smaller than documented in the primary surgery in most of the cases and repair must still be considered as the first option.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective cohort series.

Reverse Ramp Lesion Repair in Patients With Meniscotibial Ligament Avulsion Injury: The Hidden AMRI

Lesions of the meniscocapsular junction and the meniscotibial ligament (MTL) of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus are common with knee ligamentous injuries and associated with residual rotational instability if left untreated. MTL avulsion from its tibial attachment has never been described among different types of meniscocapsular disruptions so far. Both diagnosis and treatment of such an injury can be challenging. This article describes a detailed technique and proposes an algorithm to appropriate management of this rare injury.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Injured Knees With Meniscal Ramp Lesions Manifest Greater Anteroposterior and Rotatory Instability Compared With Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Injured Knees

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of ramp lesion (RL) and its repair on knee instability in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury by quantitatively assessing anteroposterior and rotational knee instability before and after ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

All primary double-bundle ACL reconstructions using hamstring autografts between 2016 and 2021 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients with RLs without other meniscal injuries were included in group R, whereas those with isolated ACL injuries constituted group C. RL was repaired using all-inside devices in all patients in group R. Knee instability, including the amount of anterior tibial translation (ATT), and the acceleration and external rotational angular velocity of the knee joint (ERAV) during the pivot-shift test were assessed at the time of surgery. The pivot-shift test grade was recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients were included in this study. Preoperatively, group R (n = 23) had significantly greater pivot-shift grades (P = .039), ATT (6.0 mm, group R; 4.5 mm, group C, P < .001), acceleration (6.8, 2.8; P = .037), and ERAV (3.9, 2.8; P = .001) than group C (n = 50). Intraoperatively, ATT (-1.0 mm, -1.0 mm; P < .001), acceleration (1.2, 1.1; P < .001), and ERAV (1.4, 1.2; P < .001) were significantly decreased compared with the preoperative values in both groups. No significant differences in these values were observed between groups R and C.

CONCLUSIONS

ACL-injured knees accompanied by RLs exhibited significantly greater anteroposterior and rotatory instability than knees with isolated ACL injuries; increased knee instability can be effectively addressed by performing RL repair in conjunction with ACL reconstruction. The quantitative assessments employed-specifically measuring ATT, acceleration, and ERAV during the pivot-shift test-have allowed us to delineate these aspects of knee instability with greater precision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level Ⅲ, retrospective comparative study.

Clinical Outcomes of Different Management Techniques for Medial Meniscal Type 3 Ramp Lesions in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Comparative Analysis Between All-inside Repair, Suture Hook Repair, and Lesions Left In Situ

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate about the best way to manage ramp lesions at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). Type 3 lesions are not visible by the transnotch approach without superior debridement, making the management debate even more problematic.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of secondary surgical interventions according to the management method of a type 3 ramp lesion concomitant with primary ACLR. The hypothesis was that the rate of secondary ACL or meniscal interventions would be higher in patients who underwent all-inside repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent primary ACLR with a type 3 ramp lesion between January 2012 and May 2020, regardless of the treatment method, was performed. The main criterion analyzed in this cohort was a secondary surgical intervention, defined as revision ACLR or a reintervention of the repaired meniscus. A survivorship analysis was performed to evaluate secondary surgical interventions in 3 groups: all-inside repair, suture hook repair, and left in situ. The following data were collected preoperatively and at the last follow-up: patient characteristics, time to surgery, side-to-side difference in laxity, pivot shift, Lysholm score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Tegner score, and meniscal repair failure rate.

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients who underwent type 3 ramp lesion repair concomitant with ACLR were included: 52 (46.0%) in the all-inside repair group, 23 (20.4%) in the suture hook repair group, and 38 (33.6%) in the lesion left in situ group. There were 17 patients (15.0%) who underwent a secondary intervention because of ACL graft failure (n = 6) or meniscal repair failure (n = 15 [4 of whom underwent a concomitant ACL reintervention]). Overall, 62 patients (54.9%) underwent combined ACLR and anterolateral ligament reconstruction, while 51 patients (45.1%) underwent isolated ACLR. In the adjusted Cox model, the type of meniscal repair was not statistically significantly associated with secondary surgical interventions. The only risk factor for secondary surgical interventions in this cohort was isolated ACLR (hazard ratio, 8.077; P = .007).

CONCLUSION

The rates of secondary surgical interventions after medial meniscal type 3 ramp lesion repair concomitant with ACLR were similar regardless of the management method of the meniscal lesion. Despite not being associated with meniscal treatment, this rate was 8 times higher for patients who underwent isolated ACLR in this cohort; this is probably because of the protection that lateral extra-articular procedures provide to the ACL graft.

Meniscal Ramp Lesion Repair Without the Need for a Posteromedial Portal

Medial meniscal ramp injury has gained the attention of orthopaedic surgeons in recent years. It consists of a tear of the peripheral insertion of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus. Its prevalence in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction varies between 9% and 40% according to different studies. Ramp lesions cannot always be diagnosed using magnetic resonance imaging scans. To identify ramp lesions, the arthroscope should be introduced into the posteromedial compartment of the knee during the routine examination of the knee (Gillquist maneuver). Not all authors advocate systematically repairing ramp injuries of the medial meniscus, especially when these injuries are small and stable. They have historically been repaired using an outside-in technique using a hook-type suture passed through a posteromedial portal. In this study, we present our all-inside suture technique without the use of a posteromedial portal.

Posterior Displacement of Meniscal Ramp Lesion Is Observed on Flexed Knee Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Deficient Knees

PURPOSE

To confirm whether posterior displacement of the detached meniscocapsular structure in ramp lesions could be observed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the flexed knee position and to clarify whether this displacement on MRI is related to greater anterior knee laxity.

METHODS

This retrospective comparative trial study included 50 patients with anterior cruciate ligament injuries in whom attendant ramp lesions were observed on preoperative MRI. All patients underwent 3-T MRI at 120° of knee flexion preoperatively. The gap distance of the ramp lesion on sagittal slices was measured, and a distance greater than 1 mm was classified as gap positive. Additionally, joint effusion in the posteromedial recess was quantitatively evaluated by measuring the surface area of joint fluid. Prior to surgery, the side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation (ATT) on stress radiographs at 20° of knee flexion was measured to evaluate anterior knee laxity. During anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the length of the ramp lesion was measured by a scale from the posteromedial portal.

RESULTS

Of the 50 knees, 29 had ramp lesion gaps greater than 1 mm on MRI at knee flexion. The gap-positive group had a significantly greater side-to-side difference in ATT (9.6 ± 3.6 mm vs 5.0 ± 2.7 mm, P < .001) and significantly larger ramp lesion length (15.7 ± 4.9 mm vs 11.7 ± 3.9 mm, P = .002) than the gap-negative group. The gap-positive group also had a significantly greater amount of joint effusion than the gap-negative group (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior displacement of the detached meniscocapsular structure in ramp lesions can be observed on MRI at knee flexion and is related to greater anterior knee laxity, lesion size, and joint effusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative trial.

The Effect of Varying Sizes of Ramp Lesions in the ACL-Deficient and Reconstructed Knee: A Biomechanical Robotic Investigation

BACKGROUND

Conflicting evidence has been reported regarding the biomechanical relevance of ramp lesions (RLs) on knee kinematics. Furthermore, the influence of the defect size of the RLs on anterior tibial translation (ATT) and external rotation (ER) is currently unknown.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the influence of RL defect size on knee kinematics in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency and after simulated ACL reconstruction (sACLR).

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Eight cadaveric knee specimens were tested in a 6 degrees of freedom robotic test setup. Force-controlled clinical laxity tests were performed with 200 N of axial compression in 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion: 5 N·m internal rotation (IR)/ER torque, 134 N ATT force, and an anteromedial drawer test consisting of 134 N ATT force under 5 N·m ER torque. After determining the native knee kinematics, the ACL was cut at the tibial insertion, followed by a transosseous refixation to simulate a surgical repair or reconstruction (simulated ACL reconstruction; sACLR). An RL was sequentially created with a length of 1, 2, and 3 cm. Each state of the RL was evaluated in the ACL-deficient state and after sACLR.

RESULTS

In the ACL-deficient state, only an RL of 3 cm length resulted in a significant increase of ATT in 30° of flexion (mean difference 0.73 mm; 95% CI, 0.36-1.1 mm). After sACLR, an RL had no significant effect. When looking at ER, an RL significantly increased ER in full extension in the ACL-deficient state in 2 cm (mean difference 0.9°; 95% CI, 0.08°-1.74°) and 3 cm length (mean difference 1.9°; 95% CI, 0.57-3.25). Furthermore, a 3-cm RL significantly increased IR in 0° of flexion in the ACL-deficient state (mean difference 1.9°; 95% CI, 0.2°-3.6°). No effect of ramp lesions on rotation was found after sACLR.

CONCLUSION

RLs result in a small increase in ATT, ER, and IR in ACL-deficient knees at early flexion angles, but not after sACLR.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Small RLs did not change time-zero knee kinematics and may, therefore, be left untreated, especially when the ACL is reconstructed.

Efficacy of all-inside devices in reducing gap and step-off in knee extension for ramp lesion repair: A cadaveric study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to assess the dynamics of the tear site of meniscal ramp lesions, particularly considering knee flexion angles, and validate anchor fixation using an all-inside device.

METHODS

Eight Thiel-embalmed paired cadaveric knees with their whole bodies were used in this study. The ramp lesions were created arthroscopically, and ramp lesion dynamics were evaluated by gradually extending the knee from 90° of knee flexion. Changes in the gap and step-off (0: no step-off; 1: cross-sectional overlap exists; and 2: tibial articular surface exposed) were evaluated at 90°, 60°, 30°, and 10° of knee flexion. After dynamic evaluation, all-inside repairs of the ramp lesions using all-inside devices were conducted. Dissection was performed to confirm the position of anchor fixation.

RESULTS

As the knee was extended, the gap significantly decreased at all knee flexion angles. Similarly, the step-off grade decreased as the knee was extended, and the step-off completely disappeared in all cases when the knee was extended from 30° to 10°. The average knee flexion angle at which the gap and step-off completely disappeared was 22.5°. After suturing the ramp lesion, arthroscopic evaluation showed that the gap had disappeared and the step-off had been repaired in all cases. Anchor fixation locations were not found within the joint but were fixed to the semimembranosus tendon or its surrounding articular capsule. Overall, 31% (5/16) anchors were fixed to the attachment site of the semimembranosus tendon, whereas the remaining were fixed to the articular capsule, located peripherally to the semimembranosus tendon.

CONCLUSION

Suturing with an all-inside device for ramp lesions is a good option, and the repair in knee extension was found to be reasonable, considering the dynamics of ramp lesions in this study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Factors Associated With Residual Pivot Shift After ACL Reconstruction: A Quantitative Evaluation of the Pivot-Shift Test Preoperatively and at Minimum 12-Month Follow-up

Background

Postoperative residual rotatory laxity remains despite improvement in surgical techniques for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR).

Purpose

To evaluate factors associated with residual pivot shift after ACLR by quantitative measurement of the pivot shift before and after surgery.

Study Design

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 97 patients who underwent primary double-bundle ACLR between June 2016 and March 2021 and underwent surgery to remove staples, with at least 12 months of follow-up evaluation, were enrolled. Quantitative measurements were performed under general anesthesia immediately before ACLR (preoperatively), after temporary fixation of the ACL graft (intraoperatively), and immediately before staple removal (postoperatively). The laxity of pivot shift was assessed using inertial sensors to measure acceleration and external rotational angular velocity (ERAV). Descriptive data were assessed for associations with postoperative acceleration and ERAV in a univariate analysis. A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with postoperative acceleration and ERAV.

Results

Anterior tibial translation, acceleration, and ERAV increased from intra- to postoperatively (P < .05). Factors significantly associated with postoperative acceleration were age (β = -0.238; P = .021), lateral posterior tibial slope (PTS) (β = 0.194; P = .048), and preoperative acceleration (β = 0.261; P = .008). Factors significantly affecting postoperative ERAV were age (β = -0.222; P = .029), ramp lesions (β = 0.212; P = .027), and preoperative ERAV (β = 0.323; P = .001).

Conclusion

Greater preoperative laxity in the pivot shift was the factor having the most significant association with residual pivot shift after ACLR using quantitative measurements under general anesthesia. Younger age, higher lateral PTS, and concomitant ramp lesions were significant predictors of residual pivot shift. These findings can help pre- and intraoperative decision-making regarding whether an anterolateral structure augmentation should be added.

Anchor-Based Meniscal Ramp Repair

Ramp lesions of the medial meniscus are underdiagnosed because of difficulty in visualizing via magnetic resonance imaging and during arthroscopy. They most often occur simultaneously with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury but may also be associated with posterior plateau contusions, steeper medial tibial plateau slope, and excess varus alignment. Upwards of 24% of ACL reconstructions have concomitant ramp lesions. Failure to repair the ramp lesion is associated with increased rotational laxity, tibial translocation, persistent pivot shift, and poorer outcomes after ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this article is to describe an all-suture anchor-based repair of a meniscal ramp lesion, which confers several advantages over traditional repair techniques.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative trial.

Arthroscopic Trans-septal Portal of the Knee With Direct Visualization and No Need for Posterolateral Portal Creation

Arthroscopic visualization and access of the posterior knee are limited when using standard anterior and posterior portals. The creation of a trans-septal portal allows for complete access to the posterior compartment as arthroscopic instruments are able to be passed back and forth between the posteromedial and posterolateral compartments. Due to the close proximity of the popliteal artery and its branches, precise portal placement and safe orientation of arthroscopic instruments are critical to avoid iatrogenic injury. The conventional technique of trans-septal portal creation, involving a posterolateral portal, can be difficult in some cases. To overcome these obstacles, a posteromedial technique of trans-septal portal creation is presented. By using the medial parapatellar portal as the viewing portal, our technique allows for direct visualization of the posterior septum on each step of creation of the trans-septal portal, eliminating the need for "blind" maneuvers. What is more, no posterolateral portal is needed, decreasing the risk of potential complications. Using the posterior cruciate ligament fibers as a main landmark for trans-septal portal placement, preservation of the posterior part of the septum is achieved. This ensures optimal safe-margin distance away from the popliteal neurovascular bundle and making the technique safe and reproducible.

Incomplete meniscal healing in early second-look arthroscopy does not indicate failure of repair: a case series

PURPOSE

To assess if incomplete meniscal healing during second-look arthroscopy at six to eight weeks after all-inside suture hook meniscus repair results in longer-term failure of repair in patients with restored knee stability.

METHODS

From 2008 to 2013, 41 patients with post-traumatic, longitudinal, vertical, complete meniscal tears with concomitant ACL injury were treated via a two-stage surgical procedure and prospectively evaluated. In the first stage, all-inside meniscus repair was performed using suture hook passers and non-absorbable sutures. In total, there were 26 medial and 16 lateral meniscus tears. A second-stage ACL reconstruction, performed six to eight weeks later, served as an early second-look arthroscopic evaluation of meniscal healing. Clinical follow-up was performed at a minimum of 24 months.

RESULTS

Second-look arthroscopy revealed 31 cases (75.6%) of complete and ten cases (24.4%) of incomplete meniscal healing. Two patients were lost prior to follow-up, and three were excluded due to recurrent instability. Therefore, 36 patients were assessed at the final follow-up. All patients with complete meniscal healing during second-look arthroscopy achieved clinical success at follow-up. Six out of nine (66.7%) of patients with incomplete meniscal healing during second-look arthroscopy achieved clinical success at follow-up (p = 0.012). One saphenous neuropathy occurred (2.4%).

CONCLUSION

Incomplete meniscal healing during early second-look arthroscopy after all-inside meniscal repair using suture hook passers and non-absorbable sutures did not necessarily result in longer-term failure in patients with restored knee stability. The described method of meniscal repair was associated with a low rate of symptomatic re-tears and complications.

Outside-in repair technique is effective in traumatic tears of the meniscus in active adults: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Meniscal injuries are common. Outside-in meniscal repair is one of the techniques advocated for the management of traumatic meniscal tears. This systematic review investigated the outcomes of the outside-in repair technique for the management of traumatic tears of the menisci. The outcomes of interest were to investigate whether PROMs improved and to evaluate the rate of complications.

METHODS

Following the 2020 PRISMA statement, in May 2023, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed with no time constraints. All the clinical investigations which reported data on meniscal repair using the outside-in technique were considered for inclusion. Only studies which reported data on acute traumatic meniscal tears in adults were considered. Only studies which reported a minimum of 24 months of follow-up were eligible.

RESULTS

Data from 458 patients were extracted. 34% (155 of 458) were women. 65% (297 of 458) of tears involved the medial meniscus. The mean operative time was 52.9 ± 13.6 min. Patients returned to their normal activities at 4.8 ± 0.8 months. At a mean of 67-month follow-up, all PROMs of interest improved: Tegner scale (P = 0.003), Lysholm score (P < 0.0001), International Knee Documentation Committee (P < 0.0001). 5.9% (27 of 458) of repairs were considered failures. Four of 186 (2.2%) patients experienced a re-injury, and 5 of 458 (1.1%) patients required re-operation.

CONCLUSION

Meniscal repair using the outside-in technique can be effectively performed to improve the quality of life and the activity level of patients with acute meniscal tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Concurrent Repair of Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesions and Lateral Meniscus Root Tears in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: The "New Terrible Triad"

Recent studies have suggested that up to 8% of patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears can present with a combined medial meniscal ramp lesion (MMRL) and lateral meniscus root tear (LMRT). MMRLs and LMRTs often are missed preoperatively and can increase the risk of ACL graft failure if left untreated. Given the potential synergistic biomechanical consequences and challenging repair techniques used for treatment, our group commonly refers to this presentation (MMRL-LMRT-ACL) as the "new terrible triad" of ACL pathology. This Technical Note aims to describe a systematic approach for arthroscopic assessment and our preferred inside-out and transtibial pull-out repair techniques to efficiently diagnose and treat a combined MMRL and LMRT at the time of ACL reconstruction surgery.

Meniscal Ramp Repair: Double-Row Anatomic Repair in Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears

The surgical management of medial meniscus ramp lesions can be challenging. Currently, repairs are performed via a trans-notch view, combined with a single posteromedial working portal. This technique, however, does not allow for a direct and complete visualization of the structures being injured, making a precise appreciation of the injured structures, as well as an anatomical repair, difficult. To overcome this limitation, a 2-portal posteromedial approach has recently been described. It allows better visualization of the mediolateral extent of the tear and a precise identification of the injured structures. In this Technical Note, an anatomic repair technique using this approach is presented. It consists of a double-row of sutures to repair individually both the meniscotibial and meniscocapsular ligament, thus restoring the 2 main components of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus to their natural insertion site.

The Posteromedial-Transseptal Portal for Arthroscopic Suture Hook Repair of Posterior Horn Tears and Popliteomeniscal Fascicles Tears of the Lateral Meniscus

We present a convenient and safe arthroscopic technique for suturing the lateral meniscus. In this technique, the clinician establishes a conventional posteromedial approach in the figure-of-four position of the knee by using the anterolateral and anteromedial observation approaches. Behind the posterior cruciate ligament, an operational approach is formed through the posterior mediastinum of the knee joint. Through this approach, suture hook can be brought to the posterior horn and body of the lateral meniscus, thus simplifying the suture of the lateral meniscus. We have used this technique to finish all-inside suture using suture hooks in a variety of types of lateral meniscal injuries, including longitudinal posterior horn tears, bucket handle meniscus tears, and tears around the popliteal hiatus area. Compared with traditional lateral meniscal all-inside suture technology through anteromedial or anterolateral approaches, this technology can suture more accurately, safely, and conveniently, avoid the involvement of the popliteal tendon suture, and the lower risk of complications such as popliteal vascular and nerve injury occur.

Application of Continuous Sewing Machine-Like Suture Technique in Meniscus Injury

Meniscus injury is a common type of knee joint injury and often requires arthroscopic repair. At present, meniscus repair methods mainly include inside-out technology, outside-in technology, and all-inside technology. Among them, all-inside technology has attracted more attention from clinicians because of its better results. To improve the shortcomings of all-inside technology, we describe a "continuous sewing machine-like" suture technique. Our technique can make the meniscus suture continuous, increase its flexibility, and also enhance the stability of the suture knot through multiple puncture suture. Our technology can be applied to more-complex meniscus injuries and can greatly reduce the cost of surgery.

Failure Rates of Repaired Bucket-Handle Tears of the Medial Meniscus Concomitant With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study of 253 Patients From the SANTI Study Group With a Mean Follow-up of 94 Months

BACKGROUND

Failure rates of repaired bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs) concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are as high as 20%. The outcomes of posteromedial portal suture hook repair have not been compared with all-inside repair techniques for this subtype of meniscal lesion.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and failure rates of patients who underwent BHMMT repair concomitant with ACLR using an all-inside technique, suture hook + all-inside technique, or suture hook + outside-in technique. It was hypothesized that no significant differences in failure rates would be found between the groups.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with a BHMMT who underwent meniscal repair during primary ACLR and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped based on the meniscal repair technique used: all-inside repair, suture hook + all-inside repair, or suture hook + outside-in repair. At the end of the study period, secondary medial meniscectomy rates were determined.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 253 patients who underwent repair of a BHMMT with concomitant ACLR with a mean follow-up of 94.0 ± 47.6 months. A total of 114 patients (45.1%) underwent all-inside repair, 61 patients (24.1%) underwent suture hook + all-inside repair, and 78 patients (30.8%) underwent suture hook + outside-in repair. Overall, there were 36 failures. The failure rates were 20.2%, 14.8%, and 5.1%, respectively (P = .0135). All-inside repairs were >4 times more likely to fail than suture hook + outside-in repairs (hazard ratio [HR], 4.103; 95% CI, 1.369-12.296; P = .0117). Failure was also 3 times higher (HR, 2.943; 95% CI, 1.224-7.075; P = .0159) for patients <30 years of age compared with those aged ≥30 years. An additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was also found to reduce the failure rate of repaired BHMMTs concomitant with ACLR.

CONCLUSION

Combined suture hook + outside-in repair of BHMMTs resulted in significantly fewer failures than all other techniques. Furthermore, age <30 years and no additional ALLR were associated with higher failure rates.

Combined Repair of Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesions and Posterior Root Tears of the Lateral Meniscus During Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Case Report

CASE

This case report describes the clinical outcomes for 2 patients who underwent a primary or revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a combined inside-out and transtibial pullout repair for a medial meniscal ramp lesion (MMRL) and a lateral meniscus root tear (LMRT), respectively. Promising short-term outcomes were seen at the one-year follow-up for both patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of these repair techniques can successfully treat a combined MMRL and LMRT injury at the time of primary or revision ACL reconstruction.