Robert W Westermann1, Rick W Wright2, Kurt P Spindler3, Laura J Huston4, Brian R Wolf5. 1. University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. 2. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA. 3. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 4. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 5. University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA Brian-wolf@uiowa.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Meniscal repair is commonly performed concurrently with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the acutely injured knee. No large-scale, prospective multicenter studies have evaluated the long-term success and patient-oriented outcomes after combined ACLR and meniscal repair. PURPOSE: To define the operative success and patient-oriented outcome scores 6 years after combined meniscal repair and ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All ipsilateral primary ACLR and meniscal repair cases from a multicenter study group between 2002 and 2004 were selected. Validated patient-oriented outcome instruments were completed at 3 time points: preoperatively and then 2 and 6 years after the index procedure. Subsequent ipsilateral knee reoperations were confirmed by operative reports to evaluate for the failure of meniscal repairs. RESULTS: In total, 286 patients with 1440 primary ACLRs underwent concurrent meniscal repairs (298 meniscal repairs). Of these, 235 (82.2%) were available for follow-up at 6 years (154 medial, 72 lateral, and 9 both lateral and medial meniscal repairs). Repaired menisci most commonly involved the peripheral one third of the meniscus (84%); patterns were typically longitudinal (84%) or displaced bucket-handle (10%), with a mean length of 16.5 ± 5.8 mm. Overall, the meniscal repair failure rate was 14% (medial: 21/154; lateral: 10/72; both: 2/9) at 6 years. Medial repairs failed earlier than lateral repairs (2.1 vs 3.7 years, respectively; P = .01). Significant improvements in outcome scores were sustained at 6-year follow-up. No differences in the suture number or type were detected between repair failures and successes. The rate of meniscal reoperations was higher in patients who underwent repair compared with those who did not have an identified meniscal injury at the time of ACLR (P < .01. CONCLUSION: Concurrent meniscal repair with ACLR is associated with failure rates approximating 14% at 6-year follow-up. Improvements in patient-oriented outcome scores were sustained at 6-year follow-up. Surgeons may expect good clinical outcomes 6 years after combined ACLR and meniscal repair.
BACKGROUND: Meniscal repair is commonly performed concurrently with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the acutely injured knee. No large-scale, prospective multicenter studies have evaluated the long-term success and patient-oriented outcomes after combined ACLR and meniscal repair. PURPOSE: To define the operative success and patient-oriented outcome scores 6 years after combined meniscal repair and ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All ipsilateral primary ACLR and meniscal repair cases from a multicenter study group between 2002 and 2004 were selected. Validated patient-oriented outcome instruments were completed at 3 time points: preoperatively and then 2 and 6 years after the index procedure. Subsequent ipsilateral knee reoperations were confirmed by operative reports to evaluate for the failure of meniscal repairs. RESULTS: In total, 286 patients with 1440 primary ACLRs underwent concurrent meniscal repairs (298 meniscal repairs). Of these, 235 (82.2%) were available for follow-up at 6 years (154 medial, 72 lateral, and 9 both lateral and medial meniscal repairs). Repaired menisci most commonly involved the peripheral one third of the meniscus (84%); patterns were typically longitudinal (84%) or displaced bucket-handle (10%), with a mean length of 16.5 ± 5.8 mm. Overall, the meniscal repair failure rate was 14% (medial: 21/154; lateral: 10/72; both: 2/9) at 6 years. Medial repairs failed earlier than lateral repairs (2.1 vs 3.7 years, respectively; P = .01). Significant improvements in outcome scores were sustained at 6-year follow-up. No differences in the suture number or type were detected between repair failures and successes. The rate of meniscal reoperations was higher in patients who underwent repair compared with those who did not have an identified meniscal injury at the time of ACLR (P < .01. CONCLUSION: Concurrent meniscal repair with ACLR is associated with failure rates approximating 14% at 6-year follow-up. Improvements in patient-oriented outcome scores were sustained at 6-year follow-up. Surgeons may expect good clinical outcomes 6 years after combined ACLR and meniscal repair.
Authors: Thomas Stein; Andreas Peter Mehling; Frederic Welsch; Rüdige von Eisenhart-Rothe; Alwin Jäger Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-06-15 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Charles V Toman; Warren R Dunn; Kurt P Spindler; Annunziata Amendola; Jack T Andrish; John A Bergfeld; David Flanigan; Morgan H Jones; Christopher C Kaeding; Robert G Marx; Matthew J Matava; Eric C McCarty; Richard D Parker; Michelle Wolcott; Armando Vidal; Brian R Wolf; Laura J Huston; Frank E Harrell; Rick W Wright Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Ryan Blackwell; Laura C Schmitt; David C Flanigan; Robert A Magnussen Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Justin W Griffin; Michael M Hadeed; Brian C Werner; David R Diduch; Eric W Carson; Mark D Miller Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Philipp Schuster; Markus Geßlein; Michael Schlumberger; Philipp Mayer; Hermann Josef Bail; Jörg Richter Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Kyle R Duchman; Robert W Westermann; Kurt P Spindler; Emily K Reinke; Laura J Huston; Annunziato Amendola; Brian R Wolf Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2015-10-01 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Rick W Wright; Laura J Huston; Amanda K Haas; Samuel K Nwosu; Christina R Allen; Allen F Anderson; Daniel E Cooper; Thomas M DeBerardino; Warren R Dunn; Brett Brick A Lantz; Barton Mann; Kurt P Spindler; Michael J Stuart; Jacquelyn S Pennings; John P Albright; Annunziato Ned Amendola; Jack T Andrish; Christopher C Annunziata; Robert A Arciero; Bernard R Bach; Champ L Baker; Arthur R Bartolozzi; Keith M Baumgarten; Jeffery R Bechler; Jeffrey H Berg; Geoffrey A Bernas; Stephen F Brockmeier; Robert H Brophy; Charles A Bush-Joseph; J Brad Butler V; John D Campbell; James L Carey; James E Carpenter; Brian J Cole; Jonathan M Cooper; Charles L Cox; R Alexander Creighton; Diane L Dahm; Tal S David; David C Flanigan; Robert W Frederick; Theodore J Ganley; Elizabeth A Garofoli; Charles J Gatt; Steven R Gecha; James Robert Giffin; Sharon L Hame; Jo A Hannafin; Christopher D Harner; Norman Lindsay Harris; Keith S Hechtman; Elliott B Hershman; Rudolf G Hoellrich; Timothy M Hosea; David C Johnson; Timothy S Johnson; Morgan H Jones; Christopher C Kaeding; Ganesh V Kamath; Thomas E Klootwyk; Bruce A Levy; C Benjamin Ma; G Peter Maiers; Robert G Marx; Matthew J Matava; Gregory M Mathien; David R McAllister; Eric C McCarty; Robert G McCormack; Bruce S Miller; Carl W Nissen; Daniel F O'Neill; Brett D Owens; Richard D Parker; Mark L Purnell; Arun J Ramappa; Michael A Rauh; Arthur C Rettig; Jon K Sekiya; Kevin G Shea; Orrin H Sherman; James R Slauterbeck; Matthew V Smith; Jeffrey T Spang; Ltc Steven J Svoboda; Timothy N Taft; Joachim J Tenuta; Edwin M Tingstad; Armando F Vidal; Darius G Viskontas; Richard A White; James S Williams; Michelle L Wolcott; Brian R Wolf; James J York Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2020-08-21 Impact factor: 6.202