Innervation of nociceptors in intact human menisci along the longitudinal axis: semi-quantitative histological evaluation and clinical implications

A Transplant or a Patch? A Review of the Biologic Integration of Meniscus Allograft Transplantation

» After transplantation revascularization does occur although data are only available for animal models.» The time zero biomechanics, that is, the biomechanical properties at the time of transplant, of a meniscus allograft transplantation appear to appropriately mimic the original so long as the graft is sized correctly within 10% of the original and bone plug fixation is used.» Allograft type, that is, fresh vs. frozen, does not appear to affect the integration of the allograft.

Meniscus tears treatment: The good, the bad and the ugly-patterns classification and practical guide

Over the years, several studies demonstrated the crucial role of knee menisci in joint biomechanics. As a result, save the meniscus has become the new imperative nowadays, and more and more studies addressed this topic. The huge amount of data on this topic may create confusion in those who want to approach this surgery. The aim of this review is to provide a practical guide for treatment of meniscus tears, including an overview of technical aspects, outcomes in the literature and personal tips. Taking inspiration from a famous movie directed by Sergio Leone in 1966, the authors classified meniscus tears in three categories: The good, the bad and the ugly lesions. The inclusion in each group was determined by the lesion pattern, its biomechanical effects on knee joint, the technical challenge, and prognosis. This classification is not intended to substitute the currently proposed classifications on meniscus tears but aims at offering a reader-friendly narrative review of an otherwise difficult topic. Furthermore, the authors provide a concise premise to deal with some aspects of menisci phylogeny, anatomy and biomechanics.

Extrusion, meniscal signal change, loss of shape, synovitis and bone marrow oedema are reliable scoring parameters to assess MRI appearance post meniscal transplant

PURPOSE

Meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) has shown good promise in restoring normal knee joint biomechanics in a meniscal deficient patient. However, MRI appearance of the meniscal allograft is often questioned and raises concerns of its viability and function. This paper aims to introduce and validate a new scoring system for MAT MRI appearance at 12 months [MRI appearance in Meniscal Transplant Score (MIMS)], using key changes such as extrusion, meniscal signal change, loss of shape, synovitis and bone marrow oedema.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 10 patients from a single surgeon series was conducted. All MAT were performed with soft tissue fixation technique. MRI was performed at 12 months post-transplant with two independent consultant musculoskeletal radiologists and one experienced meniscal transplant surgeon scoring the images obtained. Interobserver agreement and intraclass correlation were measured.

RESULTS

Interobserver agreement between examiners on individual features of the MIMS was superior for tibial bone oedema, substantial for meniscal extrusion and femoral bone oedema, moderate for meniscal shape and synovitis, and fair for meniscal signal changes. Absolute agreement between raters found good reliability (ICC = 0.774; 95% 0.359, 0.960) for single measures and excellent reliability (ICC = 0.911; 95% 0.627, 0.986) for average measures.

CONCLUSION

MIMS is a reliable method of evaluating the meniscal allograft transplant 12 months post-transplant. Further research with larger MAT cohort groups and patient reported outcome measures may be helpful to correlate its clinical significance and guide further management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Meniscus regeneration by 3D printing technologies: Current advances and future perspectives

Meniscal tears are a frequent orthopedic injury commonly managed by conservative strategies to avoid osteoarthritis development descending from altered biomechanics. Among cutting-edge approaches in tissue engineering, 3D printing technologies are extremely promising guaranteeing for complex biomimetic architectures mimicking native tissues. Considering the anisotropic characteristics of the menisci, and the ability of printing over structural control, it descends the intriguing potential of such vanguard techniques to meet individual joints’ requirements within personalized medicine. This literature review provides a state-of-the-art on 3D printing for meniscus reconstruction. Experiences in printing materials/technologies, scaffold types, augmentation strategies, cellular conditioning have been compared/discussed; outcomes of pre-clinical studies allowed for further considerations. To date, translation to clinic of 3D printed meniscal devices is still a challenge: meniscus reconstruction is once again clear expression of how the integration of different expertise (e.g., anatomy, engineering, biomaterials science, cell biology, and medicine) is required to successfully address native tissues complexities.

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: did it ever work?

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is one the most common orthopedic surgical procedures. The most common indication for APM is a degenerative meniscal tear (DMT). High-quality evidence suggests that APM does not provide meaningful benefits in patients with DMTs and may even be harmful in the longer term. This narrative review focuses on a fundamental question: considering the history and large number of these surgeries, has APM ever actually worked in patients with DMT? A truly effective treatment needs a valid disease model that would biologically and plausibly explain the perceived treatment benefits. In the case of DMT, effectiveness requires a credible framework for the pain-generating process, which should be influenced by APM. Basic research, pathoanatomy, and clinical evidence gives no support to these frameworks. Moreover, treatment of DMT with an APM does not align with the traditional practice of medicine since DMT is not a reliable diagnosis for knee pain and no evidence-based indication exists that would influence patient prognosis from APM. A plausible and robust explanation supported by both basic research and clinical evidence is that DMTs are part of an osteoarthritic disease process and do not contribute to the symptoms independently or in isolation and that symptoms are not treatable with APM. This is further supported by the fact that APM as an intervention is paradoxical because the extent of procedure and severity of disease are both inversely associated with outcome. We argue that arthroscopic treatment of DMT is largely based on a logical fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc.