Helge Eberbach1, Jörn Zwingmann2, Lisa Hohloch2, Gerrit Bode2, Dirk Maier2, Philipp Niemeyer2,3, Norbert P Südkamp2, Matthias J Feucht2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Freiburg University Hospital, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. helge.eberbach@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Freiburg University Hospital, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. 3. OCM-Clinic, Steinerstr. 6, 81369, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess sport-specific outcomes after repair of isolated meniscal tears. METHODS: A systematic electronic search of the MEDLINE and Cochrane database was performed in May 2016 to identify studies that reported sport-specific outcomes after isolated meniscal repair. Included studies were abstracted regarding study characteristics, patient demographics, surgical technique, rehabilitation, and outcome measures. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the Coleman Methodology Score (CMS). RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies with a total of 664 patients met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies was moderate, with a mean CMS of 69.7 ± 8.3. The mean patient age was 26 ± 7.2 years and 71% of patients were male. Mean preoperative Tegner score improved from 3.5 ± 0.3 to 6.2 ± 0.8 postoperatively. Comparing preinjury and postoperative Tegner scores, comparable values were observed (6.3 ± 1.1 and 5.7 ± 0.8, respectively). Return to sports on the preinjury level was achieved in 89%. Mixed-level populations returned to their preinjury activity level in 90% and professional athletes in 86%. Mean delay of return to sports varied between 4.3 and 6.5 months, with comparable results between professional and mixed-level athletes. The pooled failure rate was 21%. The failure rate was lower in professional athletes compared to mixed-level athletes (9% vs. 22%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review suggests that isolated repair of meniscal tears results in good to excellent sport-specific outcomes and a high return to sports rate in both recreational and professional athletes. The failure rate is comparable to systematic reviews not focusing on sportive patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV systematic review of Level I to Level IV studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess sport-specific outcomes after repair of isolated meniscal tears. METHODS: A systematic electronic search of the MEDLINE and Cochrane database was performed in May 2016 to identify studies that reported sport-specific outcomes after isolated meniscal repair. Included studies were abstracted regarding study characteristics, patient demographics, surgical technique, rehabilitation, and outcome measures. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the Coleman Methodology Score (CMS). RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies with a total of 664 patients met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies was moderate, with a mean CMS of 69.7 ± 8.3. The mean patient age was 26 ± 7.2 years and 71% of patients were male. Mean preoperative Tegner score improved from 3.5 ± 0.3 to 6.2 ± 0.8 postoperatively. Comparing preinjury and postoperative Tegner scores, comparable values were observed (6.3 ± 1.1 and 5.7 ± 0.8, respectively). Return to sports on the preinjury level was achieved in 89%. Mixed-level populations returned to their preinjury activity level in 90% and professional athletes in 86%. Mean delay of return to sports varied between 4.3 and 6.5 months, with comparable results between professional and mixed-level athletes. The pooled failure rate was 21%. The failure rate was lower in professional athletes compared to mixed-level athletes (9% vs. 22%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review suggests that isolated repair of meniscal tears results in good to excellent sport-specific outcomes and a high return to sports rate in both recreational and professional athletes. The failure rate is comparable to systematic reviews not focusing on sportive patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV systematic review of Level I to Level IV studies.
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: A Tucciarone; L Godente; R Fabbrini; L Garro; F Salate Santone; Claudio Chillemi Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2011-09-18 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Adam J Tagliero; Nicholas I Kennedy; Devin P Leland; Christopher L Camp; Todd A Milbrandt; Michael J Stuart; Aaron J Krych Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2020-09-26 Impact factor: 4.342
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 Sochacki; Marc R Safran; Geoffrey D Abrams; Joseph Donahue; Constance Chu; Seth L Sherman Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-11-20
Authors: Erick M Marigi; Lucas K Keyt; Matthew D LaPrade; Christopher L Camp; Bruce A Levy; Diane L Dahm; Michael J Stuart; Aaron J Krych Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2021-01-20
Authors: Jordan W Fried; Amit K Manjunath; Eoghan T Hurley; Laith M Jazrawi; Eric J Strauss; Kirk A Campbell Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2020-12-24