Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Results Between Partial Meniscectomy and Refixation of Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tears: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 1941-1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyu Sung Chung ◽  
Jeong Ku Ha ◽  
Cheol Hyun Yeom ◽  
Ho Jong Ra ◽  
Ho Su Jang ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967117S0024
Author(s):  
Aaron John Krych ◽  
Nick R. Johnson ◽  
Rohith Mohan ◽  
Diane L. Dahm ◽  
Bruce A. Levy ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (11) ◽  
pp. 3497-3503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Young Kim ◽  
Seong-Il Bin ◽  
Jong-Min Kim ◽  
Bum-Sik Lee ◽  
Sung-Mok Oh ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jarret Woodmass ◽  
Aaron Krych ◽  
Nick Johnson ◽  
Rohith Mohan ◽  
Diane Dahm ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. e37-e38
Author(s):  
Aaron J. Krych ◽  
Nick R. Johnson ◽  
Rohith Mohan ◽  
Diane Lynn Dahm ◽  
Bruce A. Levy ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0030
Author(s):  
S. Clifton Willimon ◽  
Michael Busch ◽  
Asahi Murata ◽  
Crystal Perkins

Objectives: The medial and lateral menisci function to optimize force transmission across the knee by increasing contact area between the femur and tibia, absorbing shock, and transmitting loads. The anterior and posterior meniscus roots anchor the meniscus to bone. Injuries to the meniscus root attachments result in extrusion of the meniscus, impaired distribution of hoop stresses, and progressive degenerative articular wear. As a result of these deleterious effects, there has been increasing emphasis on repair of meniscus root injuries to restore structure and function. The purpose of this study is to describe meniscus root tears, associated injuries, and minimum 2-year treatment outcomes in a series of pediatric patients. Methods: A single-institution, IRB approved, retrospective review was performed of consecutive pediatric patients less than 19 years of age with a meniscus root tear treated with transosseous root repair over a 4-year period. All patients had minimum 24-month clinical follow-up. Partial root tears treated with partial meniscectomy or irreparable root tears were excluded. All meniscus root tears were classified arthroscopically based on the tear types described by LaPradeADDIN EN.CITE 9. The primary outcomes were revision meniscus surgery and patient reported outcome scores (PROs) (Lysholm, Patient Satisfaction, and Tegner activity). Results: Twenty-one patients, 11 males and 10 females with a mean age of 15 years (range 7 – 18 years), met inclusion criteria. There were 15 lateral meniscus root tears and 6 medial meniscus root tears. The tears occurred in the posterior root in 20 patients (95%). The most common injury pattern was a lateral meniscus posterior root tear (14 patients, 67%). 18 patients (86%) had an associated ligament tear: 13 ACL tears and 5 PCL tears. Two root tears occurred in isolation, and both were the posterior root of the medial meniscus. The majority of meniscus root tears (15 patients, 71%) were root avulsions (type 5). Mean follow-up was 42 months (range 25 – 71 months). Three patients had a second surgery on the affected knee. In two patients, one with revision ACL reconstruction and one treated with chondroplasty of the patella, the meniscus root repair was noted to be well healed. A third patient sustained a new injury to the knee 4 years following medial meniscus posterior root repair and underwent partial medial meniscectomy. At final follow-up, PROs were obtained for 17 patients (81%). Mean Lysholm score was 91 (range 51 – 100). Mean patient satisfaction score was 8.7 (range 5 – 10). Fourteen of 16 patients (88%) reported returning to the same or higher level of activity following surgery. Conclusions: Meniscus root tears occur in pediatric patients, most commonly as root avulsions of the posterior root of the lateral meniscus and in association with ACL tears. This is unique as compared to the adult population, in which the medial meniscus posterior root is often injured in isolation and radial tears adjacent the root are the most commonly described injury pattern. In our case series, transosseous root repair resulted in successful outcomes in the majority of patients with durable results at midterm follow-up.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nam-Hun Lee ◽  
Hyoung-Yeon Seo ◽  
Myung-Jin Sung ◽  
Bo-Ram Na ◽  
Eun-Kyoo Song ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The best treatment for degenerative medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic meniscectomy and conservative treatment for degenerative MMPRT. Methods From January 2007 to December 2014, 146 patients (Meniscectomy group, 90; Conservative group, 56) were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scoring scale, Tegner activity scale, and Lysholm knee scoring scale at the final follow-up. Radiologic outcomes evaluated the progression of osteoarthritis (OA) according to the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) classification. We compared the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA), medial proximal tibial angle, tibial posterior slope angle, and width of medial joint space. After an average follow-up of 6.3 years, the survivorship was analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results All clinical outcomes were significantly improved in both groups after treatment, with no significant differences between the two groups at the final follow-up. The progression of OA according to the K-L classification, HKAA and width of medial joint space was significantly advanced in the meniscectomy group (p = 0.03, 0.04, 0.03, respectively). The 10-year survival rates in the meniscectomy and conservative groups were 87 and 88%, respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrated that both conservative treatment and meniscectomy provided symptomatic relief. However, it was confirmed that OA progression was more severe in the meniscectomy. We conclude that arthroscopic meniscectomy had no advantage over conservative treatment in terms of clinical outcomes and OA progression in middle-aged patients with MMPRT. Level of evidence Level III; retrospective comparative study.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Si Si Nie ◽  
Hongbo Li ◽  
Jianyin He ◽  
Guanxiang Liao ◽  
Xuelei Ke ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: To compare the short-term efficacy of the transtibial pull-out technique and gracilis autograft with suture reinforcement technique in the treatment of medial meniscus posterior root tears. Methods: A total of 64 patients with medial meniscus posterior root tears received reconstruction of the posterior root of the meniscus attachment point through the tibial tunnel between June 2018 and April 2019 were included in this study, patients were divided into 2 groups (transtibial pull-out technique group: 35 cases; gracilis autograft with suture reinforcement technique group: 29 cases) according to the different posterior meniscus root tear repair methods. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Lysholm score and IKDC score, and the demographics and functional recovery of the knee were compared between the two groups.Results: Intraoperative and postsurgical complications such as infection were not found in the two groups, and there was a statistically significant improvement in the Lysholm score,IKDC score and VAS score (P<0.001; respectively). All the patients were very satisfied with the function of their knee at the last follow-up. However, compared with the transtibial pull-out repair group, the reinforced medial meniscal root reconstruction technique with gracilis autograft group were significant improvement in the meniscus healing rates and Lysholm score, IKDC score and VAS score at the end of follow-up (P<0.05; respectively).Conclusions: Compared with the transtibial pull-out technique, the reinforced medial meniscal root reconstruction technique with gracilis autograft is advantageous for treating these patients because it is a minimally invasive procedure with superior clinical outcome and meniscus healing rates.Levels of Evidence: Ⅲ, Case-control study Retrospective comparative study


2017 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raine Sihvonen ◽  
Mika Paavola ◽  
Antti Malmivaara ◽  
Ari Itälä ◽  
Antti Joukainen ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo assess if arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is superior to placebo surgery in the treatment of patients with degenerative tear of the medial meniscus.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, participant-blinded and outcome assessor-blinded, placebo-surgery controlled trial, 146 adults, aged 35–65 years, with knee symptoms consistent with degenerative medial meniscus tear and no knee osteoarthritis were randomised to APM or placebo surgery. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the change from baseline in the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) and Lysholm knee scores and knee pain after exercise at 24 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of unblinding of the treatment-group allocation, participants' satisfaction, impression of change, return to normal activities, the incidence of serious adverse events and the presence of meniscal symptoms in clinical examination. Two subgroup analyses, assessing the outcome on those with mechanical symptoms and those with unstable meniscus tears, were also carried out.ResultsIn the intention-to-treat analysis, there were no significant between-group differences in the mean changes from baseline to 24 months in WOMET score: 27.3 in the APM group as compared with 31.6 in the placebo-surgery group (between-group difference, −4.3; 95% CI, −11.3 to 2.6); Lysholm knee score: 23.1 and 26.3, respectively (−3.2; −8.9 to 2.4) or knee pain after exercise, 3.5 and 3.9, respectively (−0.4; −1.3 to 0.5). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the secondary outcomes or within the analysed subgroups.ConclusionsIn this 2-year follow-up of patients without knee osteoarthritis but with symptoms of a degenerative medial meniscus tear, the outcomes after APM were no better than those after placebo surgery. No evidence could be found to support the prevailing ideas that patients with presence of mechanical symptoms or certain meniscus tear characteristics or those who have failed initial conservative treatment are more likely to benefit from APM.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document