To evaluate progression of individual radiographic features five years following exercise therapy or arthroscopic partial meniscectomy as treatment for degenerative meniscal tear. DesignRandomized controlled trial including 140 adults, aged 35-60 years, with a magnetic resonance image verified degenerative meniscal tear, and 96% without definite radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Participants were randomized to either 12-weeks of supervised exercise therapy or arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. The primary outcome was between-group difference in progression of tibiofemoral joint space narrowing and marginal osteophytes at five years, assessed semi-quantitatively by the OARSI atlas. Secondary outcomes included incidence of radiographic knee osteoarthritis and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, medial tibiofemoral fixed joint space width (quantitatively assessed), and patient-reported outcome measures. Statistical analyses were performed using a full analysis set. Per protocol and as treated analysis were also performed. ResultsThe risk ratios (95% CI) for progression of semi-quantitatively assessed joint space narrowing and medial and lateral osteophytes for the surgery group were 0.89 (0.55-1.44), 1.15 (0.79-1.68) and 0.77 (0.42-1.42), respectively, compared to the exercise therapy group. In secondary outcomes (full-set analysis) no statistically significant between-group differences were found. ConclusionThe study was inconclusive with respect to potential differences in progression of individual radiographic features after surgical and non-surgical treatment for degenerative meniscal tear. 6Further, we found no strong evidence in support of differences in development of incident radiographic knee osteoarthritis or patient-reported outcomes between exercise therapy and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01002794)

ObjectivesGain an overview of expected response rates (RRs) to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical quality registry-based studies and long-term cohorts in order to better evaluate the validity of registries and registry-based studies. Examine the trends of RRs over time and how they vary with study type, questionnaire format, and the use of reminders.DesignLiterature review with systematic search.Data sourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, kvalitetsregistre.no, kvalitetsregister.se and sundhed.dk.Eligibility criteriaArticles in all areas of medical research using registry-based data or cohort design with at least two follow-up time points collecting PROMs and reporting RRs. Annual reports of registries including PROMs that report RRs for at least two time points.Primary outcome measureRRs to PROMs.ResultsA total of 10 articles, 12 registry reports and 6 registry articles were included in the review. The overall RR at baseline was 75%±22.1 but decreased over time. Cohort studies had a markedly better RR (baseline 97%±4.7) compared with registry-based data at all time points (baseline 72%±21.8). For questionnaire formats, paper had the highest RR at 86%±19.4, a mix of electronic and paper had the second highest at 71%±15.1 and the electronic-only format had a substantially lower RR at 42%±8.7. Sending one reminder (82%±16.5) or more than one reminder (76%±20.9) to non-responders resulted in a higher RR than sending no reminders (39%±6.7).ConclusionsThe large variation and downward trend of RRs to PROMs in cohort and registry-based studies are of concern and should be assessed and addressed when using registry data in both research and clinical practice.

Purpose To compare patients with a concomitant full-thickness cartilage lesion and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury to patients with an isolated ACL injury at 10–15 years post ACL reconstruction. Methods This is a longitudinal follow-up of a cohort of 89 patients that were identified in the Norwegian National Knee Ligament Registry and included in the index study in 2007. The study group consisted of 30 patients that underwent ACL reconstruction and had a concomitant, isolated full-thickness cartilage lesion (International Cartilage Repair Society [ICRS] grade 3–4). Each study patient was matched with two control patients who underwent ACL reconstruction but had no cartilage lesions (ICRS grade 1–4) (n = 59). At a median follow-up of 10.2 years (range 9.9–15.6), 65 patients (74%) completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), which was the main outcome measure, resulting in 23 pairs after matching. Results At a follow-up of 10–15 years after ACL reconstruction, no significant differences in KOOS were found between patients with a concomitant full-thickness cartilage lesion and patients without cartilage lesions. There was also no significant difference between the two groups when comparing the change over time in KOOS scores from preoperative to follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvement in all KOOS subscales from preoperative to follow-up, except for in the Symptoms subscale for the control group. The greatest improvement was in the QoL subscale for the study group. Conclusion ACL-reconstructed patients with a full-thickness cartilage lesion did not report worse outcomes at 10–15 years after surgery compared with patients with an isolated ACL injury. Our findings support that there is no long-term negative effect of a concomitant cartilage lesion in an ACL-reconstructed knee. These findings should be considered when discussing treatment and informing about the expected long-term outcome after ACL reconstruction to patients with such combined injuries. Level of evidence II.

Objective To analyze and compare cartilage samples from 3 groups of patients utilizing low-input RNA-sequencing. Design Cartilage biopsies were collected from patients in 3 groups ( n = 48): Cartilage lesion (CL) patients had at least ICRS grade 2, osteoarthritis (OA) samples were taken from patients undergoing knee replacement, and healthy cartilage (HC) was taken from ACL-reconstruction patients without CLs. RNA was isolated using an optimized protocol. RNA samples were assessed for quality and sequenced with a low-input SmartSeq2 protocol. Results RNA isolation yielded 48 samples with sufficient quality for sequencing. After quality control, 13 samples in the OA group, 9 in the HC group, and 9 in the CL group were included in the analysis. There was a high degree of co-clustering between the HC and CL groups with only 6 genes significantly up- or downregulated. OA and the combined HC/CL group clustered significantly separate from each other, yielding 659 significantly upregulated and 1,369 downregulated genes. GO-term analysis revealed that genes matched to cartilage and connective tissue development terms. Conclusion The gene expression profiles from the 3 groups suggest that there are no major differences in gene expression between cartilage from knees with a cartilage injury and knees without an apparent cartilage injury. OA cartilage, as expected, showed markedly different gene expression from the other 2 groups. The gene expression profiles resulting from this low-input RNA-sequencing study offer opportunities to discover new pathways not previously recognized that may be explored in future studies.

No abstract