Search

Background: Meniscal surgery is one of the most frequent orthopaedic procedures performed worldwide. There is a wide range of possible treatment errors that can occur following meniscal surgery. In Norway, patients subject to treatment errors by hospitals and private institutions can file a compensation claim free of charge to the Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation (NPE). The purpose of this study was to systematically analyse compensation claims filed to the NPE following meniscal surgery and evaluate gender effects on accepted claims. Our hypothesis was that there was no gender difference in accepted claims. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study assessing all registered claims at the NPE after meniscal surgery from 2010 to 2020. The surgical procedures were stratified into subgroups following data collection. Data from the Norwegian Patient Registry were collected to obtain information on the numbers of the different procedures performed in hospitals and private institutions. We calculated frequencies and relative frequencies of categorical data. Differences in categorical data were calculated using the Pearson Chi-square test. Results: The total number of meniscal resections and sutures in the study period was 119,528. A total of 372 compensation claims were filed, 241 male and 130 female. Of these, 152 (40.9%) claims were accepted, while 220 (59.1%) were rejected. The most frequent reasons for filing a compensation claim were pain (114), followed by infection (98), wrong technique (38) and impaired function/instability (25).There was a significant gender difference in the acceptance of claims in favour of men (121 vs. 31, p < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis excluding infection as reason for compensation claim found no gender difference (p = 0.16) in acceptance of claims. Conclusion: Compensation claims after meniscal surgery are rare, with only 0.3% of patients filing a compensation claim. There was a marked preponderance of men with accepted claims due to a higher frequency of postoperative infections. Surgeons should be aware of this and take this into account in the decision-making before surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Meniscal injuries in the knee are usually treated surgically with arthroscopic partial resection (APR) or arthroscopic repair (AR). APR has been shown to increase the risk of osteoarthritis and the focus has shifted to repairing the meniscus with AR. The extent of this shift is yet to be established and an analysis of incidence rates (IR) of APR and AR for meniscal injuries could highlight this. Methods: Data from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) and Statistics Norway (SN) from 2010 to 2020 were collected. The number of procedures, demographics and facilities providing meniscal surgery were obtained from NPR, while population size and catchment area were collected from SN. IR of APR and AR and APR/AR rate ratios were estimated and compared. Results: A total of 119,528 knee arthroscopies were performed, 89.6% of which were APR. The number of APR performed nationally decreased by 72%, while AR procedures increased by 178%. The national IR of APR decreased from 298 to 82/100,000 inhabitants (p < 0.001). For AR, the national IR increased annually from 13/100,000 inhabitants to a peak in 2019 of 32/100,000 inhabitants (p < 0.001). The APR/AR rate ratio decreased from 22 to below five and the APR/AR trend curves showed a statistically significant decrease (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Surgical treatment of meniscal injuries has changed, with a substantial reduction in APR and a strong increase in AR. The reduction in APR, especially in older patients, suggests that meniscal surgery in Norway has undergone a paradigmatic shift, in line with recent literature. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]