Biomechanical Analysis of Segmental Medial Meniscal Transplantation in a Human Cadaveric Model

Background: Meniscal deficiency has been reported to increase contact pressures in the affected tibiofemoral joint, possibly leading to degenerative changes. Current surgical options include meniscal allograft transplantation and insertion of segmental meniscal scaffolds. Little is known about segmental meniscal allograft transplantation. Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of segmental medial meniscal allograft transplantation in the setting of partial medial meniscectomy in restoring native knee loading characteristics. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees underwent central midbody medial meniscectomy and subsequent segmental medial meniscal allograft transplantation. Knees were loaded in a dynamic tensile testing machine to 1000 N for 20 seconds at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. Four conditions were tested: (1) intact medial meniscus, (2) deficient medial meniscus, (3) segmental medial meniscal transplant fixed with 7 meniscocapsular sutures, and (4) segmental medial meniscal transplant fixed with 7 meniscocapsular sutures and 1 suture fixed through 2 bone tunnels. Submeniscal medial and lateral pressure-mapping sensors assessed mean contact pressure, peak contact pressure, mean contact area, and pressure mapping. Two-factor random-intercepts linear mixed effects models compared pressure and contact area measurements among experimental conditions. Results: The meniscal-deficient state demonstrated a significantly higher mean contact pressure than all other testing conditions (mean difference, ≥0.35 MPa; P < .001 for all comparisons) and a significantly smaller total contact area as compared with all other testing conditions (mean difference, ≤140 mm2; P < .001 for all comparisons). There were no significant differences in mean contact pressure or total contact area among the intact, transplant, or transplant-with-tunnel groups or in any outcome measure across all comparisons in the lateral compartment. No significant differences existed in center of pressure and relative pressure distribution across testing conditions. Conclusion: Segmental medial meniscal allograft transplantation restored the medial compartment mean contact pressure and mean contact area to values measured in the intact medial compartment. Clinical Relevance: Segmental medial meniscal transplantation may provide an alternative to full meniscal transplantation by addressing only the deficient portion of the meniscus with transplanted tissue. Additional work is required to validate long-term fixation strength and biologic integration.

Radiographic Methods Are as Accurate as Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Graft Sizing Before Lateral Meniscal Transplantation

Background: Accurate allograft matching is deemed critical for meniscal transplantation; thus, precise measurements are essential to correctly calculate meniscal size. Several methods for meniscal sizing have been described, but there remains a discussion on which is the most accurate for the lateral meniscus. Purpose: To compare the accuracy of radiographic, anthropometric, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) methods of determining width and length of the lateral meniscus with actual dimensions after anatomic dissection. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees without any evidence of meniscal or ligamentous injury were primarily imaged using radiography and MRI and subsequently underwent dissection to assess the anatomic size of each meniscus. Four methods were used to predict the size of the lateral menisci: anthropometric, radiographic (Pollard and Yoon), and MRI. Absolute differences in length and width between actual and predicted sizes were determined. Results: The anatomic lateral meniscal width and length were 33.01 ± 4.25 mm (mean ± SD; range, 24.84-40.18 mm) and 31.41 ± 5.06 mm (range, 25.2-40.05 mm), respectively. Regarding width, the anthropometric method demonstrated an absolute difference from anatomic measurement significantly greater when compared with the Pollard technique and MRI ( P = .002). Regarding length, the Pollard method presented an absolute difference significantly greater than all other techniques ( P = .003). In terms of the ability to measure width and length, MRI accurately predicted meniscal size within 10% of the anatomic size in 65% of measurements, the Yoon method in 54%, and the Pollard method in 20% ( P = .01). Radiographs tended to overestimate the true size of the lateral meniscus, while the anthropometric technique overestimated width in all specimens. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that MRI and the Yoon radiographic method are comparable in terms of accuracy for graft sizing before lateral meniscal transplantation. While MRI is useful, a contralateral MRI is required, which makes the Yoon radiographic method recommended given the ease and cost advantage. The original Pollard technique and the anthropometric method are not recommended. Clinical Relevance: Over- and undersizing of meniscal transplants has been implicated in graft failure. Therefore, increasing the reliability of preoperative meniscal measurements is deemed important for the success of meniscal allograft transplantation.

A pilot randomized trial of meniscal allograft transplantation versus personalized physiotherapy for patients with a symptomatic meniscal deficient knee compartment

Aims Meniscal allograft transplantation is undertaken to improve pain and function in patients with a symptomatic meniscal deficient knee compartment. While case series have shown improvements in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), its efficacy has not been rigorously evaluated. This study aimed to compare PROMs in patients having meniscal transplantation with those having personalized physiotherapy at 12 months. Patients and Methods A single-centre assessor-blinded, comprehensive cohort study, incorporating a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) was performed on patients with a symptomatic compartment of the knee in which a (sub)total meniscectomy had previously been performed. They were randomized to be treated either with a meniscal allograft transplantation or personalized physiotherapy, and stratified for malalignment of the limb. They entered the preference groups if they were not willing to be randomized. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Lysholm score and complications were collected at baseline and at four, eight and 12 months following the interventions. Results A total of 36 patients entered the study; 21 were randomized and 15 chose their treatments. Their mean age was 28 years (range 17 to 46). The outcomes were similar in the randomized and preference groups, allowing pooling of data. At 12 months, the KOOS4 composite score (mean difference 12, p = 0.03) and KOOS subscales of pain (mean difference 15, p = 0.02) and activities of daily living (mean difference 18, p = 0.005) were significantly superior in the meniscal transplantation group. Other PROMs also favoured this group without reaching statistical significance. There were five complications in the meniscal transplantation and one in the physiotherapy groups. Conclusion This is the first study to compare meniscal allograft transplantation to non-operative treatment. The results provide the best quality evidence to date of the symptomatic benefits of meniscal allograft transplantation in the short term, but a multicentre RCT is required to investigate this question further. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:56–63.