Search

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to perform a survey administered to members of the Meniscus International Network (MenIN) Study Group, seeking to delineate the most contentious aspects of meniscal extrusion classification and provide a foundation for new, more comprehensive definitions and treatments for these pathologies. Methods: MenIN Study Group is a group of international experts treating and performing research on meniscus pathology and treatment. All MenIN Study Group members were asked to complete a survey aimed at establishing criteria for the optimal classification system for meniscal extrusion. Data obtained from the completed questionnaires were transferred into a spreadsheet and then analysed. All responses are presented as counts, percentages or means. Results: Forty‐seven (85.5%) MenIN Study Group members completed the survey and were included in this analysis. Key aspects recommended for inclusion in a comprehensive classification system for meniscal extrusion included laterality (93.6%), anatomical location (76.6%), patient age (76.6%), body mass index (BMI) (68.1%) and aetiology (68.1%). For classifying meniscal extrusion, 53.2% considered the distance in millimetres from the tibial plateau's outer margin as the most reliable measurement technique on imaging. Preferences for imaging modalities varied, with 44.7% favouring weight‐bearing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 36.2% opting for weight‐bearing ultrasound due to its greater availability. Respondents advocated for a classification system addressing stability or progression of meniscal extrusion (66%), reducibility (53.2%), potential progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA) (83%), influencing treatment approaches (83%), a gradation system (83%), consideration of dynamic factors (66%), association with clinical outcomes and prognosis (76.6%) and investigation around centralization procedures (57.4%). Conclusions: In conclusion, the findings of this survey shed light on the global perspectives regarding meniscal extrusion classification. It was generally felt that a new classification of extrusion measured on MRI scans at the mid‐tibial plateau should be developed, which considers factors such as laterality, anatomical location, age, BMI and aetiology. Additionally, the results support the integration of dynamic factors and clinical outcomes in MRI‐based classifications to inform treatment approaches. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To conduct a systematic review evaluating potential correlations between preoperative articular cartilage integrity on outcomes and survivorship in patients undergoing meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). Methods: A literature search was performed by querying SCOPUS, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials from database inception through May 2023 according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. Inclusion criteria were limited to studies reporting on outcomes and survivorship following MAT based on preoperative cartilage status. Results: Sixteen studies, consisting of 1723 patients (n = 1758 total menisci), were identified in six level III and 10 level IV evidence studies. There was high heterogeneity in cartilage grading scales, reporting of concomitant cartilage procedures, and indications for MAT based on osteoarthritis. Patients with lower limb malalignment were either excluded or corrected with an osteotomy. MAT failure rate was reported in nine studies, with four studies reporting a greater rate of failure in knees with higher degrees of cartilage damage. Eight studies reported on clinical outcomes based on cartilage grade, with two studies reporting significant differences in clinical outcomes based on cartilage grade. Of the five studies reporting management of full‐thickness chondral defects with cartilage surgery, three studies reported no significant difference in survivorship based on preoperative cartilage grade, while one study reported lower survivorship and one study reported unclear results. No studies found significant differences in survivorship and outcomes between medial and lateral MAT. Conclusions: Conflicting results and high variability in reporting of concomitant cartilage repair and indications for MAT exist in studies evaluating the efficacy of MAT based on articular cartilage status. The degree of preoperative chondral damage did not have a strong relationship with clinical outcomes following MAT. Higher degrees of cartilage damage were associated with higher MAT failure rates, with possible improvement in survivorship when treated with an appropriate cartilage procedure. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]