Literature DB >> 28075154

Survivorship After Meniscal Allograft Transplantation According to Articular Cartilage Status.

Bum-Sik Lee1, Seong-Il Bin1, Jong-Min Kim1, Won-Kyeong Kim2, Jun Weon Choi3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes after meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) in arthritic knees are unclear, and objective estimates of graft survival according to the articular cartilage status have not been performed. HYPOTHESIS: MAT should provide clinical benefits in knees with high-grade cartilage damage, but their graft survivorship should be inferior to that in knees with low-grade chondral degeneration after MAT. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS: The records of 222 consecutive patients who underwent primary MAT were reviewed to compare clinical outcomes and graft survivorship. The patients were grouped according to the degree and location of articular cartilage degeneration: low-grade chondral lesions (International Cartilage Repair Society [ICRS] grade ≤2) on both the femoral and tibial sides (ideal indication), high-grade lesions (ICRS grade 3 or 4) on either the femoral or tibial side (relative indication), and high-grade lesions on both sides (salvage indication). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with the log-rank test was performed to compare the clinical survival rates and graft survival rates between the groups. A Lysholm score of <65 was considered a clinical failure, and graft failure was defined as a meniscal tear or meniscectomy of greater than one-third of the allograft, objectively evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and second-look arthroscopic surgery.
RESULTS: The mean (±SD) Lysholm score significantly improved from 63.1 ± 15.1 preoperatively to 85.1 ± 14.3 at the latest follow-up of a mean 44.6 ± 19.7 months ( P < .001). However, the postoperative scores were not significantly different between the 3 groups (85.7 ± 14.2 for ideal indication, 84.7 ± 17.0 for relative indication, and 84.7 ± 14.2 for salvage indication; P = .877). On MRI at the latest follow-up of a mean 23.0 ± 19.9 months and second-look arthroscopic surgery of a mean 19.3 ± 20.7 months, there were 25 (11.3%) failed MAT procedures (4 medial, 21 lateral); of these, 5 lateral MAT procedures (2.3%) went on to allograft removal. Clinical survival rates were not significantly different between the groups ( P = .256). However, on objective evaluation, the estimated cumulative graft survival rate at 5 years in the salvage indication group (62.2% [95% CI, 41.6-82.8]) was significantly lower than that in the other 2 groups (ideal indication: 93.8% [95% CI, 88.5-99.1]; relative indication: 90.9% [95% CI, 81.1-100.0]) ( P = .006).
CONCLUSION: Our findings showed that MAT was an effective symptomatic treatment in knees with advanced bipolar chondral lesions. However, better graft survival can be expected when articular cartilage is intact or if chondral damage is limited to a unipolar lesion. MAT should be considered before the progression of chondral damage to a bipolar lesion for better graft survivorship and should be performed cautiously in arthritic knees.

Entities:  

Keywords:  graft failure; meniscal allograft transplantation; survivorship

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28075154     DOI: 10.1177/0363546516682235

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  11 in total

Review 1.  Imaging of meniscal allograft transplantation: what the radiologist needs to know.

Authors:  Saeed Dianat; Kirstin M Small; Nehal Shah; Christian Lattermann; Jacob C Mandell
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2020-10-03       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  High-grade preoperative osteoarthritis of the index compartment is a major predictor of meniscal allograft failure.

Authors:  Philipp W Winkler; Nyaluma N Wagala; Jonathan D Hughes; Volker Musahl
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Clinical Replacement Strategies for Meniscus Tissue Deficiency.

Authors:  Dean Wang; Erik Gonzalez-Leon; Scott A Rodeo; Kyriacos A Athanasiou
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2021-11-20       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 4.  Current Concepts in Meniscus Tissue Engineering and Repair.

Authors:  Bahar Bilgen; Chathuraka T Jayasuriya; Brett D Owens
Journal:  Adv Healthc Mater       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 9.933

5.  Likelihood of Return to Duty Is Low After Meniscal Allograft Transplantation in an Active-duty Military Population.

Authors:  Ivan J Antosh; Kenneth L Cameron; Nathan A Marsh; Matthew A Posner; Thomas M DeBerardino; Steven J Svoboda; Brett D Owens
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.755

6.  Meniscal Allograft Transplantation With Concomitant Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation.

Authors:  Eric J Cotter; Rachel M Frank; Brian R Waterman; Kevin C Wang; Michael L Redondo; Brian J Cole
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2017-10-12

7.  The results of meniscal allograft transplantation surgery: what is success?

Authors:  Henry Searle; Vipin Asopa; Simon Coleman; Ian McDermott
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 8.  Meniscus allograft transplantation: indications, techniques and outcomes.

Authors:  Francisco Figueroa; David Figueroa; Rafael Calvo; Alex Vaisman; João Espregueira-Mendes
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2019-04-25

9.  Establishing Clinically Significant Outcomes After Meniscal Allograft Transplantation.

Authors:  Joseph N Liu; Anirudh K Gowd; Michael L Redondo; David R Christian; Brandon C Cabarcas; Adam B Yanke; Brian J Cole
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-01-04

Review 10.  Prognostic Factors to Determine Survivorship of Meniscal Allograft Transplant: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ding-Yu Wang; Cassandra A Lee; Yan-Zhang Li; Bo Zhang; Nan Li; Dong Jiang; Jia-Kuo Yu
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-06-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.