Risk Factors for Graft Failure After Meniscal Allograft Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Editorial Commentary: High-Grade Cartilage Lesions Require Treatment to Prevent Meniscal Allograft Transplant Failure

In patients with symptomatic high loss of meniscal volume and function due to irreparable tears, meniscal allograft transplantation may result in symptom relief and ideally prevent long-term consequences of articular cartilage degeneration and osteoarthritis. However, the degree of cartilage damage at the time of meniscal allograft transplantation is associated with graft failure, and untreated high-grade cartilage lesions increase the risk. Correction of femorotibial malalignment is also essential.

Meniscal allograft transplantation: A matched-pair analysis reveals worse sport activity level but similar clinical improvement and survival in women compared to men

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess how gender might affect the clinical outcome and survival of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT).

METHODS

A total of 358 patients (23.2% women, 76.8% men) were treated with fresh-frozen nonirradiated allografts implantated arthroscopically using a single- or double-tunnel technique without bone plugs and peripheral suture to the capsule with 'all-inside' stitches.

RESULTS

Patients were evaluated at baseline and 2-year follow-up with the Lysholm score, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales and Tegner score. Women presented higher body mass index (p < 0.0005), poorer baseline VAS (p = 0.012), Lysholm score (p = 0.005), KOOS symptom (p = 0.034) and KOOS pain (p = 0.030), Tegner score (preinjury and basal, p < 0.0001 and p = 0.002, respectively), a lower number of previous (p = 0.039) and concurrent (p = 0.001) anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions and a higher number of concurrent procedures (p = 0.032) and distal femoral osteotomies (p = 0.024). Worse results were documented in women at 2 years, with lower Lysholm score (p = 0.024) and Tegner score (p = 0.007) and a lower clinical survival rate (p = 0.03) (67.5% vs. 82.2%) in the overall patient cohort. However, the matched-pair analysis only confirmed a lower Tegner score value at 2 years (p = 0.016), while underlying the interplay of sex, age and concomitant cartilage lesions in determining the clinical outcome. The analysis of this large series of patients affected by postmeniscectomy syndrome and treated with MAT revealed gender differences.

CONCLUSION

While both genders benefited from a significant improvement, the female population presents more often with older age, concomitant cartilage lesions and a lower activity level, all factors contributing towards a lower clinical success after MAT.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, comparative study.

Significant improvements in clinical outcome measures and patient satisfaction after combined all-arthroscopic meniscal allograft transplantation and autologous chondrocyte implantation: A single-centre longitudinal study

PURPOSE

The optimal treatment approach for the complex pathology of meniscal insufficiency and coexisting full-thickness cartilage defects remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the viability, safety, and efficacy of this combined surgical approach at medium-term follow-up.

METHODS

This is a single-centre longitudinal study with blinded outcome assessment. All consecutive patients treated with combined all-arthroscopic meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) with bone bridge fixation and ACI using chondrospheres at our institution between 2001 and 2021 were eligible for inclusion. Twenty patients with an average follow-up of 72.6 ± 34.4 months were included in the statistical analysis. Clinical outcomes were assessed pre- and postoperatively using the IKDC Subjective Knee Form, Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale, KOOS, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for patient satisfaction. Failure and reoperation rates were assessed, and cartilage regeneration tissue was evaluated on postoperative MRI.

RESULTS

IKDC scores significantly improved from 52.1 ± 16.9 to 68.5 ± 16.3 (p = 0.003). Lysholm scores improved from 61.5 ± 21.7 to 78.5 ± 12.9 (p = 0.004). Tegner scores improved from 3.5 (1-4) to 4.0 (2-6) (p = 0.014). KOOS scores improved significantly across all subcategories, except 'symptoms', where improvements did not reach statistical significance. VAS for overall patient satisfaction showed improvements but did not reach statistical significance. The combined procedure was successful in 17 patients (85%). Eight patients had to undergo reoperation (40%), comprising mostly small, arthroscopic procedures. Seven reoperations were directly attributable to meniscal allograft transplantation (46.7%). Postoperative Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue scores were 68.9 ± 16.8 (n = 14).

CONCLUSION

Combined arthroscopic MAT and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) is a viable, safe, and effective treatment approach for younger patients with meniscal insufficiency and coexisting full-thickness cartilage damage, where alternative treatment options are limited. The combined surgical procedure achieved significant improvements in clinical outcome measures and patient satisfaction with acceptable failure and high arthroscopic reoperation rates. MAT is the limiting part of this combined procedure, with most failures and reoperations being attributable to MAT, as opposed to ACI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Meniscal allograft transplantation improves patient-reported outcomes in both minimal and moderate knee osteoarthritis at 1 and 2 years postoperatively

PURPOSE

Severe cartilage damage and advanced knee osteoarthritis (OA) might be associated with poor outcomes of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). The purpose of this prospective follow-up study was to explore MAT survivorship and patient satisfaction among young patients with symptomatic meniscal deficiency and radiological OA of different Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grades.

METHODS

Thirty-five consecutive MAT patients were prospectively followed up for 2 years. The lateral meniscus was replaced in 29 patients and the medial meniscus in 6 patients. Outcomes were assessed using the KOOS4 composite score, KOOS subscales, Lysholm knee score, and OA K-L grade progression from weight-bearing knee radiographs. For the outcome analysis, patients were categorized into two groups: 19 in Group A (K-L classification 0-1) and 16 in Group B (K-L classification 2).

RESULTS

In terms of KOOS4 and Lysholm scores, the patients showed a clinically significant improvement from baseline to the 1-year follow-up (22.2 points, 95% CI 16.6-27.8 for KOOS4 and 16.8 points, 95% CI 8.9-24.6 for Lysholm), and the improvement remained at 2 years (20.6 points, 95% CI 13.2-28.1 for KOOS4 and 21.5, 95% CI 12.5-30.7 for Lysholm). At the 6-month follow-up, this improvement was not yet observed. Minor between-group differences were observed in the KOOS4 and Lysholm scores for the K-L 0-1 and K-L 2 OA groups, but the estimates were imprecise with wide confidence intervals. A clinically relevant difference between these two study groups could not be found at any timepoint. The reoperation rate was higher in the K-L 2 group than in the K-L 0-1 group (31% vs. 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

MAT yielded improved patient-reported outcomes and subjective satisfaction at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. The differences from baseline exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at all timepoints. The severity of cartilage damage and knee OA in terms of the K-L grade at the time of surgery did not affect the KOOS and Lysholm scores after the MAT procedure. Knee OA progression in terms of K-L grade worsening was not observed in any patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.