Risk Factors for Meniscectomy After Meniscal Repair

Lyman, Stephen; Hidaka, Chisa; Valdez, Ana S.; Hetsroni, Iftach; Pan, Ting; Do, Huong; Dunn, Warren R.; Marx, Robert G.

doi:10.1177/0363546513503444

Cited by 106 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, subsequent meniscectomy rates were dependent on surgeon volume and experience. 14 In that study, it is unclear whether subsequent meniscectomies involved the same area of the repair, and no outcomes data were available. In our study, all repairs were done by 1 surgeon, and the details regarding subsequent arthroscopies were documented.…”

Section: Steadman Et Almentioning

confidence: 97%

Meniscus Suture Repair

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Steadman Et Almentioning

confidence: 97%

Meniscus Suture Repair

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One treatment option for the injured meniscus is partial or total meniscectomy, although well-established data suggest that increased contact stresses occurring long term can lead to poor outcomes in many cases [2,3,11,[23][24][25]. Such findings have led to a renewed focus on meniscal preservation strategies to prevent articular cartilage degeneration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platelet-rich Plasma in Meniscal Repair: Does Augmentation Improve Surgical Outcomes?

Griffin

Hadeed

Werner

et al. 2015

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

124

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Increased contact stresses after meniscectomy have led to an increased focus on meniscal preservation strategies to prevent articular cartilage degeneration. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has received attention as a promising strategy to help induce healing and has been shown to do so both in vitro and in vivo. Although PRP has been used in clinical practice for some time, to date, few clinical studies support its use in meniscal repair. Questions/purposes We sought to (1) evaluate whether PRP augmentation at the time of index meniscal repair decreases the likelihood that subsequent meniscectomy will be performed; (2) determine if PRP augmentation in arthroscopic meniscus repair influenced functional outcome measures; and (3) examine whether PRP augmentation altered clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Methods Between 2008 and 2011, three surgeons performed 35 isolated arthroscopic meniscus repairs. Of those, 15 (43%) were augmented with PRP, and 20 (57%) were performed without PRP augmentation. During the study period, PRP was used for patients with meniscus tears in the setting of no ACL reconstruction. Complete followup at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 4 years; range, 2-6 years) was available on 11 (73%) of the PRP-augmented knees and 15 (75%) of the nonaugmented knees. Clinical outcome measures including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, and return to work and sports/activities survey tools were completed in person, over the phone, or through the mail. Range of motion data were collected from electronic patient charts in chart review. With the numbers available, a post hoc power calculation demonstrated that we would have expected to be able to discern a difference using IKDC if we treated 153 patients with PRP and 219 without PRP assuming an alpha rate of 5% and power exceeding 80%. Using the Lysholm score as an outcome measure, post hoc power estimate was 0.523 and effect size was À1.1 (À2.1 to À0.05) requiring 12 patients treated with PRP and 17 without to find statistically significant differences at p = 0.05 and power = 80%. Results There was no difference in the proportion of patients who underwent reoperation in the PRP group (27% [four of 15]) compared with the non-PRP group (25% [five of 20]; p = 0.89). Functional outcome measures were not different between the two groups based on the measures used (mean IKDC score, 69; SD, 26 with PRP and 76; SD, 17 without PRP; p = 0.288; mean, Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, 66, SD, 32 with PRP and 89; SD, 10 without PRP; p = 0.065). With the numbers available there was no difference in the proportion of patients who returned to

show abstract

“…Although some studies reported that healing rate in the age range of 20 -30 years was in its highest level (21,22), in the current study, there was no significant association between age and recovery rate according to IKDC and KOOS questionnaires. Although the prevalence of meniscal injury is higher in males than females, different studies showed no significant difference in the results of meniscal tear repair (8,23). In the current study, there was a significant association between gender and IKDC and symptom (S) scale scores.…”

Section: U N C O R R E C T E D P R O O Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthroscopic Meniscal Repair in Outside-In Technique: A Clinical and Paraclinical Study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Nowadays open meniscal repair approach is completely replaced by arthroscopic meniscal repair. Objectives: The current study aimed at assessing the results of arthroscopic meniscal repair using the outside-in technique. Methods: Patients diagnosed with meniscal tearing from 2008 to 2014 fulfilling the inclusion criteria were entered to the current cohort study. Outcomes of arthroscopic meniscal repair were assessed by 2 known questionnaires, IKDC (international knee documentation committee) and KOOS (knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score), as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of knee.

show abstract

Risk Factors for Meniscectomy After Meniscal Repair

Cited by 106 publications

References 47 publications

Meniscus Suture Repair

Meniscus Suture Repair

Platelet-rich Plasma in Meniscal Repair: Does Augmentation Improve Surgical Outcomes?

Arthroscopic Meniscal Repair in Outside-In Technique: A Clinical and Paraclinical Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About