A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair in Young Patients: Comparison of All-Inside and Inside-Out Suture Techniques

The management of isolated meniscal tears in skeletally immature children. An international expert consensus

PURPOSE

The prevalence and appreciation of meniscal tears in children have increased in both number and complexity. There is currently a paucity of high-quality evidence that can guide surgeons in treating skeletally immature patients with meniscal injuries. The aim of this study was to develop comprehensive recommendations for the management of isolated meniscal tears in skeletally immature children.

METHODS

An international, two-round, modified Delphi consensus was completed. Included 'experts' were identified as having an established adult knee practice, including children and either: (1) Faculty at an international paediatric knee conference, (2) Active members of complex national paediatric multi-disciplinary groups or (3) Members of faculty on recognised national/international instructional courses aimed at teaching the management of meniscal lesions to knee surgeons. The currently available literature was reviewed, and areas of poor quality, inconclusive or absent evidence were examined and formed the focus of the study. A threshold of 70% was used to define consensus for our study based on other similar Delphi consensus studies in the literature.

RESULTS

A total of 43 experts (Round 1) and 41 experts (Round 2) took part in the Delphi study, including surgeons from Europe, the United States of America and South America. 34 statements were identified exploring three main domains-clinical assessment, management and complex tears (bucket handle, discoid and radial). Following Round 1, consensus was reached on 17 (50%) statements; subsequently, after completion of Round 2, consensus was reached on 28 (82%) statements, leaving six (18%) with no consensus. The areas of no consensus included investigation of painless clicking, the most sensitive clinical test for meniscal pathology, treatment of small radial tears (less than 1/3 width), ability to reduce chronic bucket handle tears and timing of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first modified Delphi consensus that provides evidence for surgeons treating skeletally immature children with isolated meniscal tears. A valuable level of consensus was reached on the assessment and management of simple and specialist meniscal tears. These consensus statements can both inform clinical practice and be used in the development of further high-quality research studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

Efficacy and Long-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of arthroscopic meniscus repair, focusing on success, failure, and reoperation rates. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, including studies that involved patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscus repair with a minimum follow-up of two years. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Meta-analyses were conducted using RStudio 4.3.1 software (RStudio Inc., Boston, MA), with pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated for dichotomous outcomes using a random effects model. The meta-analysis included 10 studies totaling 1,004 patients. The pooled success rate for arthroscopic meniscus repair was 83% (95% CI: 77%-89%), while the pooled failure rate was 20% (95% CI: 15%-25%), and the pooled reoperation rate was 21% (95% CI: 17%-25%). Significant heterogeneity was observed across studies (I² > 50%). Subgroup analyses based on suture techniques and concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction did not reveal significant outcome differences. Arthroscopic meniscus repair demonstrates high success rates and acceptable failure and reoperation rates, supporting its continued use in clinical practice. However, the variability in study quality and significant heterogeneity highlight the need for more rigorous, high-quality studies to refine techniques and better explore long-term outcomes.

The incidence of meniscal cyst formation following meniscal repair using the all-inside suture anchor device is comparable to conventional techniques

Purpose

Post-operative meniscal cyst formation occurs following all-inside device meniscal repair. This study aimed to compare the incidence of cysts in patients who underwent meniscal repair with and without all-inside suture devices.

Methods

This retrospective study included 227 knees that underwent meniscal repair between 2021 and 2022. The incidence of post-operative meniscal cysts was compared between patients who underwent repair using an all-inside suture anchor device (Group SA) and those who did not use an anchor (Group NA), based on post-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. Risk factors, such as the number of anchors used, were investigated. Using a subgroup analysis, the incidence of meniscal cysts based on the type of device used was investigated.

Results

Groups SA and NA comprised 125 and 102 knees, respectively. Group SA had 11 cases of cysts (9% incidence), whereas Group NA had 7 cases (7% incidence), and no statistically significant difference was observed (p = 0.63). Symptomatic cysts were observed in two patients (1.6%) in Group SA, whereas none was observed in Group NA (0%); the difference was not significant (p = 0.50). Factors such as the number of anchors and sutures used and MRI timing were not identified as risk factors. Cyst incidence varied according to anchor type: Stryker AIR+ (4 out of 55, 7%), Smith & Nephew Fast-Fix 360 (7 out of 56, 13%) and Arthrex Fiber Stitch (0 out of 26, 0%), with no significant difference found (p = 0.14).

Conclusion

The incidence of cysts in patients undergoing meniscal repair with an all-inside suture anchor device was 9%, showing no significant difference compared with Group NA. Cyst incidence was not affected by device type.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

More Is Not Merrier: Increasing Numbers of All-Inside Implants Do Not Correlate with Higher Odds of Revision Surgery

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the number of all-inside meniscal repair implants placed and the risk of repair failure. We hypothesized that the use of higher numbers of all-inside meniscus repair implants would be associated with increased failure risk. A retrospective chart review identified 351 patients who underwent all-inside meniscus repair between 2006 and 2013 by a sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon at a single institution. Patient demographics (age, body mass index [BMI], sex) and surgical data (number of implants used, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [cACLR], and tear type/size/location) were recorded. Patients who received repairs in both menisci or who had follow-up < 1-year postoperatively were excluded. Repair failure was identified through chart review or patient interviews defined as a revision surgery on the index knee such as partial meniscectomy, total knee arthroplasty, meniscus transplant, or repeat repair. Logistic regression modeling was utilized to evaluate the relationship between the number of implants used and repair failure. A total of 227 all-inside meniscus repairs were included with a mean follow-up of 5.0 ± 3.0 years following surgery. Repair failure was noted in 68 knees (30.3%)-in 28.1% of knees with fewer than four implants and in 35.8% of knees with four or more implants (p = 0.31). No significant increase in failure was observed with increasing number of all-inside medial (odds ratio [OR]: 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-1.7; p = 0.46) or lateral (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.47-1.57; p = 0.63) implants after controlling for patient age, BMI, cACLR, tear type, or size. Tears of the lateral meniscus located in the red-white and white-white zones had lower odds of failure (OR: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.02-0.88; p = 0.036) than tears within the red-red zone, and patients with cACLR had lower odds of repair failure (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.18-0.86, p = 0.024) than those without. The number of all-inside implants placed during meniscus tear repair did not affect the likelihood of repair failure leading to reoperation after controlling for BMI, age, tear type, size, location, and cACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:  III.

Efficacy and safety of arthroscopic surgery combined with hyaluronic acid for meniscal injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of arthroscopic surgery combined with hyaluronic acid in the treatment of meniscal injuries were evaluated by Meta-analysis to provide an evidence-based basis for the selection of clinical treatment options.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science English databases, and Chinese databases of China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WAN FANG, VIP, and China SinoMed had been searched up to June 2021. Quality evaluation was performed concerning the Cochrane Systematic Evaluation Tool. The obtained data were analyzed using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials with a total of 955 patients were eventually included, 473 in the arthroscopic combined with hyaluronic acid group (combined treatment group) and 482 in the arthroscopy alone group (surgery group). The results of the study revealed that the excellent treatment [OR = 3.44, 95% CI (2.10, 5.65), p < .00,001], the VAS score [MD = -0.99, 95% CI (-1.50, -0.48), p = .0002], the Lysholm score [MD = 9.70, 95% CI (6.41, 12.99), p < .00,001] and the joint mobility [MD = 6.31, 95% CI (0.84, 11.78), p = .02] of the combined treatment group were significantly better than the surgery group, the difference was statistically significant. The complications rate was comparable in both groups [OR = 0.86, 95% CI (0.29, 2.53), p = .78], with no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic surgery combined with hyaluronic acid for meniscal injury can improve the efficiency of treatment compared with arthroscopic surgery alone, as well as the efficacy in relieving joint pain and improving joint function and mobility, without increasing the incidence of complications. Arthroscopic surgery combined with hyaluronic acid administration has good effectiveness and safety profile. Therefore, hyaluronic acid supplementation is recommended after arthroscopic surgery when treating meniscal injuries.

In elite athletes with meniscal injuries, always repair the lateral, think about the medial! A systematic review

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the time required to return to sports (RTS) after surgery, the rate of revision surgery and the time required for RTS after revision surgery in elite athletes undergoing meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy, particularly analysing the difference between medial and lateral menisci. It was hypothesised that both procedures would entail similar, high rates of RTS, with the lateral meniscus exhibiting higher potential healing postprocedure compared to the medial meniscus.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. Quality assessment of the systematic review was performed using the AMSTAR-2 checklist. The following search terms were browsed in the title, abstract and keyword fields: 'meniscus' or 'meniscal' AND 'tear,' 'injury' or 'lesion' AND 'professional,' 'elite' or 'high-level' AND 'athletes,' 'sports,' 'sportsman,' 'soccer,' 'basketball,' 'football' or 'handball'. The resulting measures extracted from the studies were the rate of RTS, level of RTS, complications, revision surgery and subsequent RTS, Tegner, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

In this study, the cohort consisted of 421 patients [415 (98.6%) men and 6 (1.4%) women] with a mean age of 23.0 ± 3.0 years. All patients were elite athletes in wrestling, baseball, soccer, rugby or handball. While 327 (77.7%) patients received partial meniscectomy at a mean age of 23.3 ± 2.6 years, 94 (22.3%) patients received meniscal repair at a mean age of 22.1 ± 4.0 years. After partial meniscectomy, 277 patients (84.7%) returned to their competitive sports activity and 256 (78.3%) returned to their pre-injury activity levels. A total of 12 (3.7%) patients required revision surgery because of persistent pain [5 (1.5%) patients], chondrolysis [2 (0.7%) patients] or both chondrolysis and lateral instability [5 (1.5%) patients]. Ten (83.3%) of the twelve patients had involvement of the lateral meniscus, whereas the location of injury was not specified in the remaining two patients. After revision surgery, all patients (100%) resumed sports activity. However, after meniscal repair, 80 (85.1%) athletes returned to their competitive sports activity and 71 (75.5%) returned to their pre-injury activity levels. A total of 16 (17.0%) patients required partial meniscectomy in cases of persistent pain or suture failure. Of these, 4 (25%) patients involved lateral and medial menisci each and 8 (50%) patients were not specified. After revision surgery, more than 80.0% of the patients (13) resumed sports activity.

CONCLUSIONS

In elite athletes with isolated meniscal injury, partial meniscectomy and meniscal suture exhibited similar rates of RTS and return to pre-injury levels. Nonetheless, athletes required more time for RTS after meniscal repair and exhibited an increased rate of revision surgery associated with a reduced rate of RTS after the subsequent surgery. For lateral meniscus tears, meniscectomy was associated with a high rate of revision surgery and risk of chondrolysis, whereas partial medial meniscectomy allowed for rapid RTS but with the potential risk of developing knee osteoarthritis over the years. The findings of this systematic review suggested a suture on the lateral meniscus in elite athletes because of the high healing potential after the procedure, the reduced risk of developing chondrolysis and the high risk of revision surgery after partial meniscectomy. Furthermore, it is important to evaluate several factors while dealing with the medial meniscus. If rapid RTS activity is needed, a hyperselective meniscectomy is recommended; otherwise, a meniscal suture is recommended to avoid accelerated osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO-CRD42022351979 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=351979 ).

All-Inside Meniscus Repair

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The indications for partial meniscectomy are becoming increasingly limited, and recent evidence suggests that the meniscus should be preserved whenever possible. Because of its many proposed advantages, all-inside meniscus repairs are becoming increasingly common. This review discusses the indications, advantages, disadvantages, and biomechanical and clinical outcomes of all-inside meniscus repair.

RECENT FINDINGS

All-inside meniscus repair demonstrates equal functional outcomes, healing rates, and complications compared to inside-out repair of vertical longitudinal and bucket-handle tears with the advantages of decreased surgical time and faster post-operative recovery. In addition, return-to-sport and activity levels are high following all-inside repair regardless of whether concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is performed. Biomechanical studies have demonstrated advantages of all-inside meniscal based repairs on radial and horizontal tears. All-inside meniscus repair compares favorably to inside-out repair of vertical longitudinal and bucket-handle tears and continues to increase in popularity. Both capsular based and meniscal based repairs can be used to repair a variety of tear patterns. While biomechanical results are encouraging, further research on the clinical outcomes of meniscal based repairs is needed to elucidate the role of these techniques in the future.

Higher healing rate after meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction for tears located in vascular zone 1 compared to zone 2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the percentage of completely healed meniscal tears after arthroscopic repair combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) for the different vascular zones of the meniscus.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Emcare were searched on 19 May 2020 for articles reporting healing rates after arthroscopic meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR for the different meniscal vascular zones as assessed by second-look arthroscopy. Data on meniscal tears were extracted as located in zones 1, 2 or 3, according to the Cooper classification. Studies were graded in quality using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled analyses were performed utilizing a random-effects model. Meta-analyses were performed using R version 3.6.2 and SPSS statistical software version 25.0. The study was registered with PROSPERO (ID:CRD42020176175).

RESULTS

Ten observational cohort studies met the inclusion criteria, accounting for 758 meniscal tear repairs in total. The pooled overall proportion of healing was 78% (95% CI 72-84%). The mean weighted proportion of healing was 83% (95% CI 76-90%) for studies (n = 10) reporting zone 1 tears and 69% (95% CI 59-79%) for studies (n = 9) reporting zone 2 tears. No study reported healing rates for zone 3 tears. The pooled overall odds ratio was 2.5 (95% CI 1.00-6.02), indicating zone 1 tears as 2.5 times more likely to heal than zone 2 tears.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that meniscal tears localized in vascular zone 1 were more likely to heal than those in zone 2.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A systematic review about long-term results after meniscus repair

PURPOSE

Aim of this systematic review was to analyze long-term results after meniscus refixation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out in various databases on studies on long-term results after meniscus refixation with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Primary outcome criterion was the failure rate. Secondary outcome criteria were radiological signs of osteoarthritis (OA) and clinical scores.

RESULTS

A total of 12 retrospective case series (level 4 evidence) were identified that reported about failure rates of more than 7 years follow-up. There was no statistical difference in the failure rates between open repair, arthroscopic inside-out with posterior incisions and arthroscopic all-inside repair with flexible non-resorbable implants. In long-term studies that examined meniscal repair in children and adolescents, failure rates were significantly higher than in studies that examined adults. Six studies have shown minor radiological degenerative changes that differ little from the opposite side. The reported clinical scores at follow-up were good to very good.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrates that good long-term outcomes can be obtained in patients after isolated meniscal repair and in combination with ACL reconstruction. With regard to the chondroprotective effect of meniscus repair, the long-term failure rate is acceptable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Inside-Out Approach to Meniscus Repair: Still the Gold Standard?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary on the current literature and trends regarding use of the inside-out approach to meniscus repair. Additionally, the paper describes the authors preferred techniques for inside-out meniscus repair utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral exposures.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been a substantial increase in recent publications regarding meniscus repair. However, comparisons regarding the optimal repair technique have not been conclusive. Despite the recent increase in use of all-inside devices, multiple investigations with short-to-mid-term follow-up have demonstrated similar rates of meniscus healing between inside-out and all-inside repair techniques. Similarly, current literature describes comparable failure rates of around 20%. There are variations in the profile of complications, with all-inside devices having more implant-related complications and inside-out techniques with higher neurovascular injuries. Inside-out meniscus repair is a versatile, cost-effective technique that remains the gold standard for management of most meniscus tear patterns. Through a thoughtful approach, efficient suture retrieval and repair can be performed while protecting critical neurovascular structures. All-inside meniscus repair devices have increased in popularity and surgeon access, but this technique is not without limitations and comparisons to inside-out meniscus repair demonstrates equivocal outcomes.

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.

Preoperative varus alignment and postoperative meniscus extrusion are the main long-term predictive factors of clinical failure of meniscal root repair

PURPOSE

No studies have been conducted to determine long-term predictors of clinical failure after surgical root repair. This study identified long-term prognostic factors of clinical failure after pull-out repair of medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) at a minimum of 10 year follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 37 patients who underwent MMPRT pull-out repair and had been observed for more than 10 years were recruited for this study. The mean follow-up period was 125.9 ± 21.2 months. Clinical failure of the procedures was defined as conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Participants were categorized into two groups: non-failure and failure groups. Various factors, including demographic features and radiologic findings, were analyzed and compared between the two groups. Meniscus extrusion was assessed at coronal magnetic resonance imaging preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Independent risk factors were determined by univariate analysis and logistic regression analysis. To determine the cut-off value for risk factors, the receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was performed.

RESULTS

In total, eight patients (22%) were converted to TKA during the follow-up period. With univariate analysis, statistically significant differences between two groups were observed in mechanical varus alignment (P = 0.018), rate of the number of patient with more meniscal extrusion values after surgery (P = 0.024), and the difference between the preoperative and 1-year postoperative value of meniscus extrusion (mm) (P = 0.010). In a logistic analysis, OR of mechanical varus alignment and differences in meniscus extrusion value before and 1 year after surgery was 1.5 (P = 0.048) and 3.7 (P = 0.034). The cut-off values of mechanical varus alignment and differences in meniscus extrusion values were 5 degrees and 0.7 mm.

CONCLUSION

Clinically, preoperative varus alignment and increased meniscal extrusion after surgery were found to be predictive for a clinical failure after meniscal root repair in a long-term perspective. Thus, these negative prognostic factors should be taken into consideration for performing root repair in MMPRTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

All-Cause Failure Rates Increase With Time Following Meniscal Repair Despite Favorable Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to perform a meta-analysis of studies reporting meniscus repair outcomes. Pooled analyses of such studies will provide an accurate estimate of the outcomes that can be expected following meniscal repair at various postoperative time points.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of meniscal repair failure (defined as persistent symptoms, lack of healing on magnetic resonance imaging or revision surgery) and other clinical outcomes was performed following meniscal repair. Patients included had traumatic, nondegenerative meniscal tears, were skeletally mature, and had specific time-points after surgery. Repairs included were performed either in isolation, or with concomitant ACL reconstruction. Because of the inherent heterogeneity of single-arm meta-analyses, pooled analyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Rates of all-cause meniscal repair failure was pooled to be 12% at 0-1 years (95% CI: .09-.16), 15% at 2-3 years (95% CI: .11-.20), and 19% at 4-6 years (95% CI: .13-.24). Sensitivity analysis for studies performing meniscal repair entirely on patients with concomitant ACL reconstruction (ACLR) showed comparable rates of failure at similar time intervals. Development of osteoarthritis, in patients with knees previously free from articular pathologies, was 4% at 2-3 years (95% CI: .02-.07), and 10% at 4-6 years (95% CI: .03-.25).

CONCLUSION

Meniscus repair for traumatic injuries have an all-cause failure rate that increases from 12% to 19% through a time period ranging from 1-6 years following surgery. The failure rates were comparable for patients with meniscal repairs performed with concomitant ACLRs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic Review of Level II-IV Studies.

Good Clinical Success Rates Are Seen 5 Years After Meniscal Repair in Patients Regularly Undertaking Extreme Flexion

Purpose

To report the functional and radiologic outcomes of meniscal repair healing in a cohort of patients with a high demand for loaded extreme flexion angles after undergoing meniscal repair.

Methods

We performed a retrospective clinical and radiologic evaluation of patients who perform extreme knee flexion activities on a daily basis at a minimum follow-up of 2 years after meniscal repair. International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, and Tegner scores were obtained, and clinical examinations and radiologic (magnetic resonance imaging and radiography) evaluations were performed.

Results

Of 47 eligible patients, 39 patients (40 knees) were available for review with an average follow-up time of 5 years (range, 2-9 years). The average age was 26.7 years (range, 19-39 years); 38 patients were men. The average time from injury to surgery was 20.9 months (range, 3 days to 120 months). Associated anterior cruciate ligament injury was present in 31 knees, but only 20 underwent simultaneous anterior cruciate ligament surgery. The mean International Knee Documentation Committee score was 88.9 (range, 53-99). The mean Lysholm score was 90.9 (range, 48-100). The mean Tegner activity level dropped from 6.18 before injury to 5.51 at the time of evaluation. According to the Barrett criteria for clinical outcomes, complete healing was observed in 29 of 40 knees (72.5%). There was a statistically significant correlation between the functional outcomes and the clinical outcomes (P = .008). On magnetic resonance imaging, 22 of 38 knees (57.9%) showed completely healed menisci.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that loaded deep knee flexion may be safe after a period of restricted rehabilitation, and clinical and radiologic tissue healing is independent of the overall functional outcome.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, case series with subgroup analysis.

An increasing trend of the number of meniscus allograft transplantation in Korea

PURPOSE

Meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) can be performed to treat symptomatic patients with meniscus-deficient knees. However, the current epidemiologic status of MAT is unknown in many countries, including Korea. This study aimed to investigate the national trends of MAT in Korea which covers MAT procedures by the Korean national health insurance system.

METHODS

Information from the national database was acquired through the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) from 2010 to 2017. All patients encoded as MAT were included. The total number of MATs and their incidence per 100,000 persons were determined, and the results were stratified by age and sex.

RESULTS

The total number of MATs and their incidence per 100,000 persons per year were 369 and 0.77, respectively, in 2010, which increased to 826 and 1.72, respectively, in 2017. The number of MATs increased by 124% over 8 years. The peaks for the total number of MATs and their incidence were seen in patients in their 20 s in 2010, but in 2017, the peaks were observed in patients who were in their 40 s. MAT was performed more frequently in males (61%) than in females (39%) over the study period.

CONCLUSION

The total number of MATs and their incidence had increased by 124% between 2010 and 2017. The peak treatment age range for MAT changed from 20 years of age in 2010 to 40 years of age in 2017, and MAT was performed more frequently in males than in females.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Learning Curve For Lateral Meniscal Allograft Transplantation: Preventing Meniscal Extrusion

PURPOSE

This study analyzes the large number of lateral meniscal allograft transplantation (LMAT) procedures conducted by a single surgeon over 23 years to determine whether the absolute amount of graft subluxation and the incidence of extrusion are different at the present time compared to the early MAT era.

METHODS

We reviewed 320 cases of LMAT performed by a single surgeon between 1996 and 2019. This cohort was chronologically divided into 8 groups (of 40 subjects). The absolute amount of subluxation was measured by the coronal sections of magnetic resonance images taken 1 year after operation. Subluxation by more than 3 mm was considered as extrusion. The graft extrusion learning curve was plotted in each series using the learning curve cumulative summation test (LC-CUSUM).

RESULTS

Extrusion incidence was 41.6%, and the mean absolute amount of graft subluxation was 3.4 ± 2.2 mm for all subjects. There were significant between-group differences in extrusion incidence and absolute amount of graft subluxation (extrusion incidence, P < .001; absolute amount of graft subluxation, P < .001), and the extension incidence and graft subluxation decreased from Group I (72.5%, 4.6 ± 1.7) to Group VIII (27.5%, 2.5 ± 2.1). LC-CUSUM analysis signaled that the surgeon had achieved predefined acceptable outcomes in avoiding extrusion after 128 cases.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of extrusion and absolute amount of graft subluxation decreased significantly over a period of 23 years, and the surgeon achieved a certain level of proficiency after 128 cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Case series.

Meniscus Repair Techniques

The menisci play a vital role in maintaining knee function and protecting the chondral surfaces. Acute and chronic tears are common injuries among both young athletes and older patients with early degenerative changes. The progression of physiological derangement and chondral injury after meniscus injury and meniscectomy have prompted interest in expanding meniscus repair techniques. Recent literature encourages an attempt at repair in tear patterns previously declared irreparable if the tissue quality allows. The orthopedic surgeon should understand the multitude of techniques available to them and be prepared to combine techniques to optimize the quality of their repair construct. While biological augmentation may show some promising early results, the quality of the current data precludes strong recommendations in their favor.

Meniscal repair: The current state and recent advances in augmentation

Meniscal injuries represent one of the most common orthopedic injuries. The most frequent treatment is partial resection of the meniscus, or meniscectomy, which can affect joint mechanics and health. For this reason, the field has shifted gradually towards suture repair, with the intent of preservation of the tissue. "Save the Meniscus" is now a prolific theme in the field; however, meniscal repair can be challenging and ineffective in many scenarios. The objectives of this review are to present the current state of surgical management of meniscal injuries and to explore current approaches being developed to enhance meniscal repair. Through a systematic literature review, we identified meniscal tear classifications and prevalence, approaches being used to improve meniscal repair, and biological- and material-based systems being developed to promote meniscal healing. We found that biologic augmentation typically aims to improve cellular incorporation to the wound site, vascularization in the inner zones, matrix deposition, and inflammatory relief. Furthermore, materials can be used, both with and without contained biologics, to further support matrix deposition and tear integration, and novel tissue adhesives may provide the mechanical integrity that the meniscus requires. Altogether, evaluation of these approaches in relevant in vitro and in vivo models provides new insights into the mechanisms needed to salvage meniscal tissue, and along with regulatory considerations, may justify translation to the clinic. With the need to restore long-term function to injured menisci, biologists, engineers, and clinicians are developing novel approaches to enhance the future of robust and consistent meniscal reparative techniques.

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.

Hip-to-calcaneus alignment differs from hip-to-talus alignment in patients with genu varum deformity

PURPOSE

To (1) compare the weight-bearing line (WBL) ratios of the knee joints measured using the conventional (hip-to-talus radiographs, HTRs) and novel (hip-to-calcaneus radiographs, HCRs) orthoradiograms, (2) compare the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle between cases with < 5% and > 5% differences in WBL ratios between two orthoradiograms, and (3) investigate the optimal cutoff value (COV) of the HKA angle causing inconsistency in the orthoradiograms.

METHODS

Sixty limbs of 31 patients with HTR and HCR records were retrospectively reviewed. After drawing the mechanical axis on each radiograph, the WBL ratios of the knees were calculated and compared between the conventional and novel orthoradiograms. In subgroup analysis, cases with < 5% and > 5% differences in WBL ratios between two orthoradiograms were classified as consistent and inconsistent groups, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve based on the HKA angles of the lower limbs was used to identify the COV causing the inconsistency between the orthoradiograms.

RESULTS

Inter- and intra-rater reliabilities of all radiologic measurements were > 0.75. The WBL ratios showed no significant difference between the two orthoradiograms. However, the HKA angle was significantly larger in the inconsistent group than in the consistent group (7.0° ± 1.8° vs. 4.4° ± 2.5°; P < 0.001). The COV of the HKA angle that caused inconsistency in the two orthoradiograms was 4.0° (area under the curve, 0.774).

CONCLUSION

The hip-to-calcaneus alignment differed significantly from the hip-to-talus alignment in patients with genu varum deformity. HCR measurement can be a complementary method for planning corrective osteotomy for patients with genu varum deformity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

The predictive factors that are associated with the number of sutures used during meniscal repair

Purpose

To investigate factors associated with the consumption of a large number of sutures during arthroscopic meniscus repair procedures.

Methods

All patients who received meniscal repair, with or without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2019 were included in the current study. Demographic data (sex, age, body mass index (BMI), and injury-to-surgery interval) and surgical data (the site of the tear, side of the meniscus, presence of an ACL rupture or not and the number of sutures) were retrospectively collected from our medical records. The number of sutures was divided into two groups (1–2 sutures versus > 2 sutures). The stitching process was implemented through an all-inside technique using a meniscal repair device (Fast-Fix; Smith & Nephew). According to the length and stability of the meniscal tear, one to seven sutures were used. Univariate analysis consisted of chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression was then performed to adjust for confounding factors.

Results

A total of 242 patients, including 168 males and 57 females, was finally included. In the univariate analysis, we found that those patients who underwent meniscus repair within one month after meniscus tear were more likely to need fewer sutures than those who underwent surgery more than one month after injury (70/110 versus 59/115, p=0.062). In total, 75/109 (68.8%) lateral meniscal tears were repaired with fewer sutures than medial (34/72, 47.2%) and bilateral meniscus injuries (20/44, 45.4%; p=0.003). In the multivariate analysis, we found that the duration of injury (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.16–3.64, p=0.013), presence of an ACL injury (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.97–7.21, p< 0.001) and the side of the meniscus (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14–0.65, p=0.002) were associated with the number of sutures used during meniscal repair procedures.

Conclusions

Patients who underwent meniscal repair within one month after meniscus tear, especially lateral menisci tears, were more likely to need fewer sutures.

Study design

Case-control study; level of evidence, 3.

Risk factors for all-inside meniscal repair failure in isolation and in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

This study examines the relationship between meniscus tear presentations and failure rates following all-inside repair in isolation and in conjunction with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Eighty seven consecutive patients undergoing all-inside meniscal repair at a single institution from July 2016 to June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Details of patient presentation, tear type and location, the presence or absence of simultaneous ACL reconstruction, and surgical repair details were recorded to evaluate the relationship between patient characteristics and the primary endpoint of repair failure.

RESULTS

Patients were followed for an average of 2.7 ± 0.8 years. Three patients (3.4%) experienced 30-day complications including 1 deep vein thrombosis and 2 joint aspirations. Within the study time frame, 15 repairs (17.2%) failed, with 10 (11.5%) failing within one year of the initial procedure; the average time to failure was 12.3 ± 9.0 months. Patients undergoing concurrent ACL reconstruction were less likely to experience repair failure (9.7% vs. 36.0%, p = .009), while bucket-handle repairs were more likely to fail during the study period (45.0% vs. 9.0%, p = .001). These trends remained after controlling for tear location, body mass index, and number of sutures (ACL reconstruction Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.229, p = .029; Bucket-handle OR: 9.400, p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest concurrent ACL reconstruction at the time of meniscal repair is associated with increased repair survival. The all-inside technique may be successfully used across a variety of tear types and locations, although further study of its efficacy in repairing bucket-handle tears is warranted.

Hybrid Inside-Out-Outside-In Meniscal Repair Through a Small Skin Incision

Although the updated generation of all-inside devices for meniscal repair is more convenient to deploy and can provide comparable clinical outcomes with those of the inside-out procedure, the latter is still a very useful technique, giving many advantages over the former. The critical drawback of the conventional inside-out technique is the need for preparation of the accessory incision to prevent the risk of soft-tissue entrapment and neurovascular injury while retrieving the exiting meniscal needles, especially at the posterior corner of the knee. To minimize the space volume of the incision, a small, bluntly dissected track guided by the first exiting meniscal needle is sufficient in our hybrid inside-out-outside-in technique. The guiding cannula for the first meniscal needle passage is a commercial inside-out device, whereas the guiding cannula for retrieval in the subsequent meniscal needle passages is a spinal needle applied in an outside-in manner via the small track. Subsequent meniscal needles can be inserted in an inside-out or outside-in manner according to the design of the suture construct.

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Meniscal Repair Versus Partial Meniscectomy for Medial Meniscus Root Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Given the superiority of meniscal repair over partial meniscectomy according to biomechanical data, the clinical outcomes of meniscal repair are likely to be better than those of partial meniscectomy for a medial meniscus root tear (MMRT).

Purpose/Hypothesis:

This review was designed to compare the clinical and radiological results between meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy for MMRTs. It was hypothesized that meniscal repair would result in better clinical and radiological results compared with partial meniscectomy.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

Studies were included in the review if they (1) included patients with MMRTs who underwent primary arthroscopic meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy and (2) analyzed validated patient-reported outcomes and/or radiological evaluations. Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated to compare partial meniscectomy with meniscal repair for each outcome.

Results:

A total of 13 studies were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 33.5 and 47.2 months in the meniscal repair group and partial meniscectomy group, respectively. The change in the Lysholm score from preoperatively to postoperatively was statistically significantly in favor of meniscal repair (OR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.55-3.12]), while no difference was found with respect to the change in the Tegner score between the 2 surgical approaches (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.65-2.24]). The prevalence of postoperative severe knee osteoarthritis (OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.17-0.54]) as well as that of reoperations (OR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.19]) were significantly in favor of meniscal repair.

Conclusion

Better outcomes were seen after meniscal repair compared with partial meniscectomy for MMRTs, with greater improvements in Lysholm scores, and lower rates of progression to knee osteoarthritis, and lower reoperation rate.

Vertical Continuous Meniscal Suture Technique

Meniscal injuries are common in the population, representing the major cause of functional impairment in the knee. Vertical longitudinal injuries of the meniscus can be stable or unstable. When extensive, they are commonly unstable and can lead to clinical signs of significant functional disability. Vertical longitudinal injuries have the best prognosis for repair, especially when occurring in the meniscal periphery, called the red-red zone. A recently developed type of meniscal suture device called Meniscus 4 A-II enables the surgeon to perform a meniscal suture from the inside-out continuously, reducing surgical time. Because it allows the surgeon to use a single and inexpensive device to repair the entire injury, costs are significantly reduced. Here, an approach to carry out continuous meniscal repair with vertical sutures is described. This technique warrants excellent stability to the meniscal repair, increasing the chances of a successful outcome. We believe that the popularization of the repair technique from the inside out using the Meniscus 4-All device will help many surgeons around the world save menisci that otherwise would have a great chance of being excised, since it is a cheap, reproducible, and easy-to-handle device.

An Up-to-Date Review of the Meniscus Literature: A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Background:

A large number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding the meniscus have been published.

Purpose:

To provide a qualitative summary of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding the meniscus.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A systematic search of all meta-analyses and systematic reviews regarding the meniscus and published between July 2009 and July 2019 was performed with PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database. Published abstracts, narrative reviews, articles not written in English, commentaries, study protocols, and topics that were not focused on the meniscus were excluded. The most pertinent results were extracted and summarized from each study.

Results:

A total of 332 articles were found, of which 142 were included. Included articles were summarized and divided into 16 topics: epidemiology, diagnosis, histology, biomechanics, comorbid pathology, animal models, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM), meniscal repair, meniscal root repairs, meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT), meniscal implants and scaffolds, mesenchymal stem cells and growth factors, postoperative rehabilitation, postoperative imaging assessment, patient-reported outcome measures, and cost-effectiveness. The majority of articles focused on APM (20%), MAT (18%), and meniscal repair (17%).

Conclusion:

This summary of systematic reviews and meta-analyses delivers surgeons a single source of the current evidence regarding the meniscus.

The modified cross-suture technique for unilateral pulled-out anchor during all-inside meniscal repair

Background

Meniscal repair has received increasing attention, but for inexperienced doctors, unilateral suture anchor pulling out may occur during all-inside meniscal repair, and the treatment outcome may be affected. When the errors happened intraoperatively, how to minimize the loss under guaranteeing of treatment effectiveness is a topic worth studying.

Purpose

To explore the practicability and effectiveness of the modified cross-suture method for arthroscopic remediation of unilateral suture anchor pulling out of an all-inside meniscal repair system.

Methods

From May 2014 to May 2017, 28 patients diagnosed with injuries of the meniscus and anterior cruciate ligaments (ACL) from the First Department of Orthopaedics of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University were enrolled in the study as the observation group, including 18 males and 10 females with an average age of 25.5 ± 2.3 years (range 18–42 years). All patients underwent ACL reconstruction concurrently. All meniscus injuries were repaired with an all-inside meniscal repair technique, and 1–3 needles of unilateral suture anchor pulling out occurred intraoperatively. The modified cross-suture method was used to remedy the error of anchor pulling out and to eventually complete an effective repair. Another 30 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction and all-inside meniscal concurrently without unilateral suture anchor pulling out, including 20 males and 10 females with an average age of 26.3 ± 1.9 years (range 19–45 years), were enrolled as the control group. During postoperative follow-up, range of motion, Lachman test and pivot shift test were performed during the physical examination. The clinical healing of the meniscus was evaluated according to the Barrett standard. The meniscus healing status was also confirmed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The function of the knee joint was evaluated according to the IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores.

Results

Twenty-five patients in the observation group and 28 patients in the control group completed the follow-up, with an average follow-up of 18.4 ± 5.2 months. All operations were performed by the same surgeon. At the follow-up 1 year after the operation, the average knee ROM of the two groups was 125.2 ± 4.3 degrees and 124.7 ± 3.8 degrees, the clinical healing rate of the meniscus of the two groups was 92.0% (23/25) and 92.9% (26/28), the MRI healing rate of the menniscus of the two groups was 72.0% (18/25) and 71.4% (20/28), and the IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores of the two groups were 90.52 ± 2.8, 89.17 ± 3.1, and 6.81 ± 1.7 and 91.42 ± 1.9, 90.32 ± 3.4, and 7.02 ± 1.4, respectively. The differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The modified cross-suture method is practicable and effective for arthroscopic remediation of unilateral suture anchor pulling out in an all-inside meniscal repair system.

All-inside versus inside-out suture techniques in arthroscopic meniscus repair: A prospective randomized study protocol

BACKGROUND

With advancements in our understanding of meniscal function, treatment options for meniscal injuries have evolved considerably over the past few decades. The aim of the current study was to compare the all-inside and inside-out techniques with regard to retear rate, functional outcomes, and perioperative complications in patients who had undergone arthroscopic meniscus repair. We hypothesized that there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative outcomes after arthroscopic meniscus repair.

METHODS

This study was a prospective randomized blinded study, with a parallel design and an allocation ratio of 1:1 for the treatment groups. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board in our hospital and written informed consent was obtained from all subjects participating in the trial. It was carried out in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. A total of 70 patients who meet inclusion criteria are randomized to either all-inside or inside-out group. The primary outcome measure was retear rate. Retear was determined by repeat arthroscopic evaluation of patients with follow-up for symptoms of persistent or new pain, catching, or locking that was possibly related to the meniscal repair. Secondary outcomes included disease-specific quality of life measurement with the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool, range of motion, operative time, and adverse events at surgery or throughout the follow-up period.

RESULTS

This study has limited inclusion and exclusion criteria and a well-controlled intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5589).

Root Repair Versus Partial Meniscectomy for Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tears: Comparison of Long-term Survivorship and Clinical Outcomes at Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The importance of repair in medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) has been increasingly recognized because it restores hoop tension. However, no study has compared the long-term outcomes between meniscectomy and repair.

HYPOTHESIS

Survivorship and clinical outcomes of repair would be better than those of meniscectomy after long-term follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2009, patients with MMPRTs who had been followed up for at least 10 years after partial meniscectomy (n = 18) or pullout repair (n = 37) were recruited. Clinical assessments, including the Lysholm score and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, were evaluated preoperatively and at the final follow-up. The final results in each group were compared with the preoperative results, and the final results of the groups were compared. Clinical failure was defined as conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and the final clinical scores were assessed just before TKA. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to investigate the survival rates of surgical procedures.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD follow-up period was 101.4 ± 45.9 and 125.9 ± 21.2 months in the meniscectomy and repair groups, respectively (P = .140). The mean Lysholm and IKDC scores, respectively, in the meniscectomy group were 50.8 ± 7.7 and 37.6 ± 7.0 preoperatively and 58.2 ± 22.1 and 44.4 ± 19.0 postoperatively (P = .124; P = .240). In the repair group, the mean Lysholm score and IKDC score, respectively, significantly increased from 52.3 ± 10.9 and 41.0 ± 9.6 preoperatively to 77.1 ± 24.0 and 63.7 ± 20.6 postoperatively (P < .001; P < .001). The final Lysholm and IKDC scores in the repair group were significantly better than those in the meniscectomy group (P = .004; P = .003). In cases of clinical failure, 10 patients (56%) in the meniscectomy group and 8 patients (22%) in the repair group converted to TKA in the follow-up period (P = .016). According to Kaplan-Meier analysis, the 10-year survival rates for the meniscectomy and repair groups were 44.4% and 79.6%, respectively (P = .004).

CONCLUSION

In MMPRTs, root repair was superior to partial meniscectomy in terms of clinical results for at least 10 years of follow-up. From a long-term perspective, repair with restoration of hoop tension is more effective management than meniscectomy.

Continuous Meniscal Suture Technique of the Knee

The menisci are fibroelastic structures interposed between the articular surfaces of the femur and tibia. They absorb impact and transmit load. Meniscal injury may compromise function and cause rapid joint degeneration, leading to the development of secondary osteoarthritis. Surgical treatment of meniscal injury is usually performed by arthroscopy, and meniscectomy or meniscal suture may be associated with such treatment. Meniscal suture should be considered when the injury compromises the proper functioning of the meniscus to recover its anatomy and function. Different meniscal suture techniques exist; the most widely used are the inside-out, outside-in, and all-inside techniques. The gold-standard repair technique is the inside-out technique. A drawback of this technique is the need to alternate between intra- and extra-articular structures for every stitch, which makes it even more laborious. We describe the continuous meniscal suture technique, also called "meniscal stitching," for a medial meniscal bucket-handle injury. This technique is performed from the inside out and allows the surgeon to perform multiple stitches with the same thread quickly and effectively. This surgical technique is performed using a single meniscal suture device that was developed by our group, called the "Meniscus 4 A-II" device.

Second-look arthroscopic findings and clinical outcomes of meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison of suture and meniscus fixation device

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the healing rate of repaired meniscus and functional outcomes of patients who received all-inside meniscal repair using sutures or devices with concomitant arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among the patients who have ACL tear and posterior horn tear of medial or lateral meniscus, 61 knees who received all-inside repair using sutures (suture group, n = 28) or meniscal fixation devices (device group, n = 33) with concomitant ACL reconstruction during the period from January 2012 to December 2015, followed by second-look arthroscopy, were retrospectively reviewed. Healing status of the repair site was assessed by second-look arthroscopy. Through the clinical assessment, clinical success (negative medial joint line tenderness, no history of locking or recurrent effusion, and negative McMurray test) rate of the repaired meniscus and functional outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score and Lysholm knee score) was evaluated.

RESULTS

In a comparison of healing status of repaired meniscus evaluated by second-look arthroscopy, suture group had 23 cases of complete healing (82.1%), 4 cases of incomplete healing (14.3%), and 1 case of failure (3.6%). Device group had 18 cases of complete healing (54.5%), 4 cases of incomplete healing (24.2%), and 7 cases of failure (21.2%) (p = 0.048). Clinical success rate of the meniscal repair was 89.3% (25 cases) and 81.8% (27 cases) in suture group and device group, respectively (p = 0.488). No significant difference of functional outcomes was observed between the two groups (p > 0.05, both parameters).

CONCLUSIONS

Among the patients who received meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction, suture group showed better healing status of repaired meniscus based on the second-look arthroscopy than device group. However, no significant between-group difference of clinical success rate and functional outcomes was observed.

National Trends of Meniscectomy and Meniscus Repair in Korea

BACKGROUND

Meniscus surgeries are frequently performed in orthopaedics. However, their current status is not well known in many countries, including Korea. This study aimed to investigate the national trends of meniscus surgery in Korea.

METHODS

Information from the national database was acquired through the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service from 2010 to 2017. All cases coded as meniscectomy or meniscus repair were included. The total number and incidence of cases of meniscus surgery per 100,000 persons were determined, and the results were stratified by age and gender. The meniscus repair ratio for the total number of meniscus surgeries was evaluated.

RESULTS

The total number and incidence of meniscectomy cases were 65,752 and 137, respectively, in 2010, which increased to 74,088 and 154, respectively, in 2017. The number of meniscectomies increased by 12.67% in 8 years. The total number and incidence of meniscus repair cases were 9,055 and 18, respectively, in 2010, which increased to 14,947 and 31 in 2017. The number of meniscus repairs increased by 65.04%. The meniscus repair ratio was 12.1% in 2010, which increased to 16.8% in 2017. The highest peak was noted for patients who underwent meniscus surgeries in their 50s and 60s. Meniscectomy was performed more frequently in women (57%) than in men (43%), whereas repair was performed more frequently in men (54%) than in women (46%) over the study period.

CONCLUSION

The total number and incidence of meniscus surgeries increased from 2010 to 2017; the number and incidence of meniscus repair procedures increased more rapidly than those of meniscectomy, with the peak treatment age for both surgeries being in the 50s and 60s. The current study will contribute to understanding the epidemiology of meniscus surgery, its prevention, and cost-saving measures in Korea.

Editorial Commentary: The Benefits of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Images to Evaluate the Safety of All-Inside Meniscal Repair

All-inside meniscal repair is a useful alternative to inside-out repair, particularly for the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus, because open approach to the complex posterolateral corner can be avoided. However, risk to the neurovascular structures is a major concern, and surgeons must be aware of portal placement, degree of penetration, patient size, and patient positioning. Imaging studies may be misleading, as they are generally obtained with the knee in extension. In the future, advanced imaging by 3-dimensional computed tomography may better allow us to preoperatively plan for a safe approach to the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus using all-inside repair techniques.