Search

Purpose: To compare the long-term clinical and radiological results of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) for discoid lateral meniscus (DLM) patients with MAT for non-discoid lateral meniscus patients and meniscectomy (ME) for DLM patients and, thus, to determine whether DLM patients are suitable candidates for MAT., Methods: Eight MAT cases in DLM patients were identified (discoid MAT group), six MAT cases in non-discoid lateral meniscus patients (non-discoid MAT group) and ten total meniscectomy cases in DLM patients (discoid ME group) were matched as controls. Subjective evaluations, postoperative radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were conducted at 5 years and 10-14 years, respectively. Joint degeneration was evaluated by the Kellgren-Lawrance (KL) grade and joint space width (JSW). MRI with T2 mapping sequences was used to quantitatively evaluate degeneration of the joint cartilage and shrinkage of the allografts. Student's t test was used to compare quantitative variables and the Mann‒Whitney U test was used to compare categorical variables., Results: There was no difference in Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner or VAS scores amongst the discoid MAT, non-discoid MAT and discoid ME groups at the final follow-up. No revision surgery was performed in any MAT patient. The JSW narrowing in the discoid MAT group was better than that in the discoid ME group (0.8 ± 0.4 mm vs. 2.1 ± 1.3 mm, p = 0.012) and worse than that in the non-discoid MAT group (0.1 ± 0.1 mm, p = 0.003). The KL progression of the discoid MAT group was less than that of the discoid ME group (1.3 ± 0.7 vs. 2.3 ± 0.9, p = 0.034). The discoid ME group had worse cartilage lesion progression than the discoid MAT and non-discoid MAT groups. The allograft width of the DLM patients shrank more than that of the non-discoid patients at the meniscus midbody (3.6 ± 0.9 mm vs. 6.2 ± 1.9 mm, p = 0.015)., Conclusion: Compared to meniscectomy, MAT achieved similar long-term symptom relief and superior chondroprotection in discoid meniscus patients. Despite more graft shrinkage, the outcomes of MAT in discoid meniscus patients were comparable to those in non-discoid meniscus patients. Therefore, DLM patients may be suitable candidates for MAT procedures., Level of Evidence: Level III., (© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).)

Purpose: As a simple and invasive treatment, arthroscopic medial meniscal posterior horn resections (MMPHRs) can relieve the obstructive symptoms of medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) but with the risk of aggravating biomechanical changes of the joint. The aim of this study was to analyze dynamic simulation of the knee joint after medial meniscus posterior root tear and posterior horn resection., Methods: This study established static and dynamic models of MMPRTs and MMPHRs on the basis of the intact medial meniscus model (IMM). In the finite element analysis, the three models were subjected to 1000 N axial static load and the human walking gait load defined by the ISO14243-1 standard to evaluate the influence of MMPRTs and MMPHRs on knee joint mechanics during static standing and dynamic walking., Results: In the static state, the load ratio of the medial and lateral compartments remained nearly constant (2:1), while in the dynamic state, the load ratio varied with the gait cycle. After MMPHRs, at 30% of the gait cycle, compared with the MMPRTs condition, the maximum von Mises stress of the lateral meniscus (LM) and the lateral tibial cartilage (LTC) were increased by 166.0% and 50.0%, respectively, while they changed by less than 5% during static analysis. The maximum von Mises stress of the medial meniscus (MM) decreased by 55.7%, and that of the medial femoral cartilage (MFC) increased by 53.5%., Conclusion: After MMPHRs, compared with MMPRTs, there was no significant stress increase in articular cartilage in static analysis, but there was a stress increase and concentration in both medial and lateral compartments in dynamic analysis, which may aggravate joint degeneration. Therefore, in clinical treatments, restoring the natural structure of MMPRTs is first recommended, especially for physically active patients., (© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes between the immediate and delayed meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT)., Methods: Nine menisci were transplanted immediately after total meniscectomy (immediate group, IM), and 10 menisci were delayed transplanted in patients with the median of 35 months (range 9-92 months) after total meniscectomy (delayed group, DE). Patient's subjective clinical outcomes including VAS, IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores as well as muscle strength measures were compared. Joint degeneration was evaluated by both radiographs to assess joint space width narrowing, Kellegren-Lawrence (KL) grade and MRI with T2 mapping sequences to quantitatively analyze both cartilage and meniscal allograft degeneration., Results: The median follow-up time was 10.8 years (range 10-14 years). The IKDC (IM vs DE, 89.8 vs 80.9, n.s.) and Lysholm scores (IM vs DE, 87.7 vs 78.0, n.s.) were close in two groups, while the IM group showed slightly lower VAS (IM vs DE, 0.2 vs 1.5, p = 0.031), higher Tegner score (IM vs DE, 7 vs 3.5 p = 0.021) and better quadriceps muscle strength. The IM group had less joint space narrowing (IM vs DE, 0.35 mm vs 0.71 mm, n.s.), less KL grade progression (IM vs DE, 0.6 vs 1.7, p = 0.041) on radiographs and less chondral lesions development on MRIs (Cartilage Degeneration Index, IM vs DE, 252 vs 2038, p = 0.025). All meniscal grafts exhibited degeneration by showing grade 3 signal on MRI, and 4 (4/9) in the IM group and 8 (8/10) cases in the DE group. The T2 value of cartilage and meniscal allograft in the IM group was close to that of the healthy control and was significantly lower than that of the DE group., Conclusion: Compared to the conventional delayed MAT, the immediate MAT achieved better cartilage and meniscus protection in the long-term, while its superiority in patient-reported outcomes was limited., Level of Evidence: IV., (© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).)