Takao Minami1,2, Takeshi Muneta1, Ichiro Sekiya1, Toshifumi Watanabe1, Tomoyuki Mochizuki1, Masafumi Horie1, Hiroki Katagiri1, Koji Otabe1, Toshiyuki Ohara1, Mai Katakura1, Hideyuki Koga3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital of Medicine, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1, Kimiidera, Wakayama City, Wakayama, 641-8509, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital of Medicine, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan. koga.orj@tmd.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to investigate (1) meniscus status and clinical findings in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured patients to clarify associations between the meniscus posterior root tear (PRT) and knee instability, and (2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of the PRT to clarify sensitivity and specificity of MRI and prevalence of meniscus extrusion. METHODS: Three hundred and seventeen patients with primary ACL reconstruction were included. PRTs for both medial and lateral sides were confirmed by reviewing surgical records. Preoperative MRI was reviewed to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of the PRT and meniscus extrusion width (MEW). Clinical information regarding the number of giving-way episodes, preoperative KT-1000 measurements and preoperative pivot shift was also assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients had a lateral meniscus (LM) PRT, whereas only four patients had a medial meniscus PRT. One hundred and seventeen patients had no meniscus tear (control). Twenty-eight patients (71.8%) showed positive signs of the LMPRT based on at least one view of MR images, with the coronal view showing the highest sensitivity. MEW in the LMPRT group was significantly larger than that in the control group. The preoperative pivot shift test grade in the LMPRT group was significantly greater than that in the control group. There were no significant differences in other parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In ACL-injured patients, the LMPRT was associated with ALRI as well as with meniscus extrusion. The coronal view of MRI was useful in identifying the LMPRT, although its sensitivity was not high. Therefore, surgeons should prepare to repair PRTs at the time of ACL reconstruction regardless of MRI findings, and they should make every effort to repair the LMPRT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to investigate (1) meniscus status and clinical findings in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured patients to clarify associations between the meniscus posterior root tear (PRT) and knee instability, and (2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of the PRT to clarify sensitivity and specificity of MRI and prevalence of meniscus extrusion. METHODS: Three hundred and seventeen patients with primary ACL reconstruction were included. PRTs for both medial and lateral sides were confirmed by reviewing surgical records. Preoperative MRI was reviewed to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of the PRT and meniscus extrusion width (MEW). Clinical information regarding the number of giving-way episodes, preoperative KT-1000 measurements and preoperative pivot shift was also assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients had a lateral meniscus (LM) PRT, whereas only four patients had a medial meniscus PRT. One hundred and seventeen patients had no meniscus tear (control). Twenty-eight patients (71.8%) showed positive signs of the LMPRT based on at least one view of MR images, with the coronal view showing the highest sensitivity. MEW in the LMPRT group was significantly larger than that in the control group. The preoperative pivot shift test grade in the LMPRT group was significantly greater than that in the control group. There were no significant differences in other parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In ACL-injured patients, the LMPRT was associated with ALRI as well as with meniscus extrusion. The coronal view of MRI was useful in identifying the LMPRT, although its sensitivity was not high. Therefore, surgeons should prepare to repair PRTs at the time of ACL reconstruction regardless of MRI findings, and they should make every effort to repair the LMPRT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Mininder S Kocher; J Richard Steadman; Karen K Briggs; William I Sterett; Richard J Hawkins Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2004 Apr-May Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: M-J Berthiaume; J-P Raynauld; J Martel-Pelletier; F Labonté; G Beaudoin; D A Bloch; D Choquette; B Haraoui; R D Altman; M Hochberg; J M Meyer; G A Cline; J-P Pelletier Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2004-09-16 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Philipp Forkel; Constantin von Deimling; Lucca Lacheta; Florian B Imhoff; Peter Foehr; Lukas Willinger; Felix Dyrna; Wolf Petersen; Andreas B Imhoff; Rainer Burgkart Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Maurice Balke; Sebastian Metzlaff; Svea Faber; Thomas Niethammer; Philip P Roessler; Ralf Henkelmann; Theresa Diermeier; Alexander Kurme; Philipp W Winkler; Sebastian Colcuc; Ge Rald Zimmermann; Wolf Petersen Journal: Orthopade Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 1.087