Meniscal repair by all-inside technique with Fast-Fix device

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the results and effectiveness of the technique of meniscal repair type all-inside using Fast-Fix device. Methods A retrospective cohort study evaluating 22 patients with meniscal surgery between January 2004 and December 2010 underwent meniscal repair technique for all-inside with the Fast-Fix device with or without ACL reconstruction. Function and quality of life outcomes were chosen by the IKDC and Lysholm score, before and postoperatively, and reoperation rates, relying to the time of final follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student's t test. Results The mean follow-up was 59 months (16–84). The Lysholm score showed 72% (16 patients) of excellent and good results (84–100 points), 27% (6 patients) fair (65–83 points) and no cases classified as poor (<64 points). According to the IKDC: 81% (18 patients) of excellent and good results (75–100 points), 18% of cases regular (50–75 points) and no patient had poor results (<50 points). There were no failures or complications. Conclusion The technique of meniscal repair type all-inside using the Fast-Fix device is safe and effective for the treatment of meniscal lesions in the red zone or red-white with or without simultaneous ACL reconstruction, with good and excellent results in most patients Level 4 Study.

Functional outcome of arthroscopic meniscal repair in meniscal tears: a prospective study in tertiary care hospital in North India

“…Stein et al, in his study reported mean LT score of 91.54±8.95 at final follow up. Albertoni et al found out the mean LT score of 89.95±10.39 at the end of his study (Table1) 18. …”

Remnant preserving ACL reconstruction with a functional remnant is related to improved laxity but not to improved clinical outcomes in comparison to a nonfunctional remnant

“…Meniscal sutured subjects remained non‐weight‐bearing for 6 weeks, followed by another 2 weeks of partial weight bearing. Flexion was restricted to 90º during the first 4 weeks and was then gradually increased [3]. Return to sports was allowed after at least 80% of muscle recovery during isokinetic and or comparative maximum extension strength evaluation.…”

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

“…These limitations led to the development of more flexible, easier-to-use suture-based devices 18,19 . These suture-based repair devices have demonstrated favorable biomechanical properties 8,20 , lower neurovascular injury, and favorable outcomes, particularly for peripheral tears 14,18,29,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] . Even still, iatrogenic injuries have been reported with newer suture-based repairs and older all-inside repair devices alike, which may include chondral lesions, neurovascular injury, or local foreignbody reactions 22,29-36 . This article is protected by copyright.…”

“…18,19 These suture-based repair devices have demonstrated favorable biomechanical properties, 8,20 lower neurovascular injury, and favorable outcomes, particularly for peripheral tears. 14,18,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Even still, iatrogenic injuries have been reported with newer suture-based repairs and older allinside repair devices alike, which may include chondral lesions, neurovascular injury, or local foreign-body reactions. 22,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] One potential concern associated with the use of all-inside devices is the size of the devices.…”