Wei Li1, Jianying Pan1, Jintao Li1, Jinshan Guo1,2, Chun Zeng1, Denghui Xie1. 1. Department of orthopedic Surgery, Center for Orthop aedic Surgery, The Third Afiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, China. 2. Department of Histology and Embryology, School of Basic Medical Science, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In patients with partial meniscus defect, the implantation of polyurethane meniscal scaffold has become a common method for the treatment of meniscus vascular entry and tissue regeneration. However, it is unclear whether polyurethane meniscal scaffold will yield better clinical and MRI results after surgery. This meta-analysis compared the clinical and MRI results of polyurethane meniscal scaffold in some patients with meniscus defects. METHODS: By searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a systematic review of studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of patients with polyurethane meniscal scaffold implantation. The search terms used are: "meniscus", "meniscal", "scaffold", "Actifit" "polyurethane" and "implant". The study was evaluated based on the patient's reported outcome score, accompanying surgery, and radiology results. Genovese scale was used to evaluate morphology and signal intensity, and Yulish score was used to evaluate the imaging performance of articular cartilage. RESULTS: There were 16 studies that met the inclusion criteria, a total of 613 patients, and the overall average follow-up time was 41 months. The clinical scores at the final follow-up, such as VAS, IKDC, Tegner, and KOOS, were significantly improved compared with preoperatively. The MS, SI, and IIRMC scores evaluated in MRI showed no significant difference between preoperative and final follow-up. However, for AC (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.11-1.00; P = 0.05) and AME (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.22; P < 0.01), the final follow-up results were worse than preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found that compared with preoperative, the clinical effect of the final follow-up was significantly improved. However, MS, SI, and IIRMC in MRI parameters did not change significantly. In addition, the final follow-up results of AC and AME showed a deteriorating trend. Therefore, for patients with partial meniscus defects, polyurethane meniscal scaffold seem to be a viable option, and further research is needed to determine whether the deterioration of AC and AME is clinically relevant.
OBJECTIVE: In patients with partial meniscus defect, the implantation of polyurethane meniscal scaffold has become a common method for the treatment of meniscus vascular entry and tissue regeneration. However, it is unclear whether polyurethane meniscal scaffold will yield better clinical and MRI results after surgery. This meta-analysis compared the clinical and MRI results of polyurethane meniscal scaffold in some patients with meniscus defects. METHODS: By searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a systematic review of studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of patients with polyurethane meniscal scaffold implantation. The search terms used are: "meniscus", "meniscal", "scaffold", "Actifit" "polyurethane" and "implant". The study was evaluated based on the patient's reported outcome score, accompanying surgery, and radiology results. Genovese scale was used to evaluate morphology and signal intensity, and Yulish score was used to evaluate the imaging performance of articular cartilage. RESULTS: There were 16 studies that met the inclusion criteria, a total of 613 patients, and the overall average follow-up time was 41 months. The clinical scores at the final follow-up, such as VAS, IKDC, Tegner, and KOOS, were significantly improved compared with preoperatively. The MS, SI, and IIRMC scores evaluated in MRI showed no significant difference between preoperative and final follow-up. However, for AC (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.11-1.00; P = 0.05) and AME (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.22; P < 0.01), the final follow-up results were worse than preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found that compared with preoperative, the clinical effect of the final follow-up was significantly improved. However, MS, SI, and IIRMC in MRI parameters did not change significantly. In addition, the final follow-up results of AC and AME showed a deteriorating trend. Therefore, for patients with partial meniscus defects, polyurethane meniscal scaffold seem to be a viable option, and further research is needed to determine whether the deterioration of AC and AME is clinically relevant.
Authors: Pablo Eduardo Gelber; Alexandru Mihai Petrica; Anna Isart; Raquel Mari-Molina; Juan Carlos Monllau Journal: Knee Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Karl F Schüttler; Felix Haberhauer; Markus Gesslein; Thomas J Heyse; Jens Figiel; Olaf Lorbach; Turgay Efe; Philip P Roessler Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-08-23 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Joan C Monllau; Francesco Poggioli; Juan Erquicia; Eduardo Ramírez; Xavier Pelfort; Pablo Gelber; Raúl Torres-Claramunt Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2018-02-23 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Tineke De Coninck; Wouter Huysse; Laurent Willemot; René Verdonk; Koenraad Verstraete; Peter Verdonk Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Adam G Culvenor; Britt Elin Øiestad; Harvi F Hart; Joshua J Stefanik; Ali Guermazi; Kay M Crossley Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2018-06-09 Impact factor: 13.800