PURPOSE: To characterize the effect of radial tears (RTs) of the lateral meniscus and their subsequent treatment (inside-out repair, partial meniscectomy) on joint contact mechanics during simulated gait. METHODS: Six human cadaveric knees were mounted on a simulator programmed to mimic human gait. A sensor was inserted below the lateral meniscus to measure peak joint contact pressure location, magnitude, and contact area. The following conditions were compared: intact meniscus, 30% RT (at the popliteal hiatus), 60% RT, 90% RT, repair, and partial meniscectomy. Data were analyzed in the midstance phase of gait (14% and 45%) when axial force was at its highest (2,100 N). RESULTS: Intact knees had peak contact pressures of 5.9 ± 0.9 MPa and 6.4 ± 1.1 MPa at 14% and 45% of gait, respectively. RTs of up to and including 60% had no effect on pressure magnitude or location. RTs of 90% resulted in significantly increased peak pressure (8.4 ± 1.1 MPa) in the postero-peripheral aspect of the tibial plateau and reduced contact area versus the intact knee, at 45% of gait. Repair resulted in a significant decrease in peak pressure (7.7 ± 1.0 MPa) relative to 90% RT but had no effect on contact area. Partial lateral meniscectomy resulted in areas and pressures that were not significantly different from 90% tears (8.7 ± 1.5 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: Simulated large RTs of the lateral meniscus in the region of the popliteal hiatus show unfavorable dynamic contact mechanics that are not significantly different from those resulting from a partial lateral meniscectomy. Pressure was significantly reduced with inside-out repair but was not affected by partial meniscectomy; contact area was not restored to that of the intact condition for either procedure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Large RTs in the region of the popliteal hiatus show unfavorable dynamic contact mechanics. Copyright Â
PURPOSE: To characterize the effect of radial tears (RTs) of the lateral meniscus and their subsequent treatment (inside-out repair, partial meniscectomy) on joint contact mechanics during simulated gait. METHODS: Six human cadaveric knees were mounted on a simulator programmed to mimic human gait. A sensor was inserted below the lateral meniscus to measure peak joint contact pressure location, magnitude, and contact area. The following conditions were compared: intact meniscus, 30% RT (at the popliteal hiatus), 60% RT, 90% RT, repair, and partial meniscectomy. Data were analyzed in the midstance phase of gait (14% and 45%) when axial force was at its highest (2,100 N). RESULTS: Intact knees had peak contact pressures of 5.9 ± 0.9 MPa and 6.4 ± 1.1 MPa at 14% and 45% of gait, respectively. RTs of up to and including 60% had no effect on pressure magnitude or location. RTs of 90% resulted in significantly increased peak pressure (8.4 ± 1.1 MPa) in the postero-peripheral aspect of the tibial plateau and reduced contact area versus the intact knee, at 45% of gait. Repair resulted in a significant decrease in peak pressure (7.7 ± 1.0 MPa) relative to 90% RT but had no effect on contact area. Partial lateral meniscectomy resulted in areas and pressures that were not significantly different from 90% tears (8.7 ± 1.5 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: Simulated large RTs of the lateral meniscus in the region of the popliteal hiatus show unfavorable dynamic contact mechanics that are not significantly different from those resulting from a partial lateral meniscectomy. Pressure was significantly reduced with inside-out repair but was not affected by partial meniscectomy; contact area was not restored to that of the intact condition for either procedure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Large RTs in the region of the popliteal hiatus show unfavorable dynamic contact mechanics. Copyright Â
Authors: Stephen H J Andrews; Jerome B Rattner; Heather A Jamniczky; Nigel G Shrive; Adetola B Adesida Journal: J Anat Date: 2015-01-09 Impact factor: 2.610
Authors: Asheesh Bedi; Tony Chen; Thomas J Santner; Saadiq El-Amin; Natalie H Kelly; Russell F Warren; Suzanne A Maher Journal: Proc Inst Mech Eng H Date: 2013-06-26 Impact factor: 1.617
Authors: Daniel M Buckland; Patrick Sadoghi; Matthias D Wimmer; Patrick Vavken; Geert I Pagenstert; Victor Valderrabano; Claudio Rosso Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Jeffrey B Driban; Matthew S Harkey; Robert J Ward; Grace H Lo; James W MacKay; Timothy E McAlindon Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2019-11-26 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Hongsheng Wang; Albert O Gee; Ian D Hutchinson; Kirsten Stoner; Russell F Warren; Tony O Chen; Suzanne A Maher Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2014-04-28 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Hongqiang Guo; Thomas J Santner; Tony Chen; Hongsheng Wang; Caroline Brial; Susannah L Gilbert; Matthew F Koff; Amy L Lerner; Suzanne A Maher Journal: J Biomech Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 2.712