Literature DB >> 33791890

The future of meniscus science: international expert consensus.

Nicholas N DePhillipo1, Robert F LaPrade2, Stefano Zaffagnini3, Caroline Mouton4,5, Romain Seil4,5,6, Philippe Beaufils7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the main focus areas for research and development for furthering the state of meniscus science in 2021.
METHODS: An electronic survey including 10 questions was sent in a blind fashion to the faculty members of the 5th International Conference on Meniscus Science and Surgery. These faculty served as an expert consensus on the future of research and development areas of meniscus science. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ranking weighted averages were calculated to score survey questions.
RESULTS: Of the 82 faculty, 76 (93%) from 18 different countries completed the survey (84% male, 16% female). The highest ranked future research and development focus areas were meniscus repair, biologics, osteotomy procedures, addressing meniscus extrusion, and the development of new therapies for the prevention of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Currently, the most 'valuable' type of biologic reported for meniscus treatment was platelet-rich plasma. The main reported global research limitation was a lack of long-term clinical outcomes data. The most promising emerging medical technologies for improving meniscus science were 3-D printing, personalized medicine, and artificial implants.
CONCLUSIONS: This survey suggests that the future of meniscus science should be focused on meniscal preservation techniques through meniscus repair, addressing meniscal extrusion, and the use of orthobiologics. The lack of long-term clinical outcomes was the main reported research limitation globally for meniscus treatment. Future product development utilizing emerging medical technologies suggest the use of 3-D printing for meniscal transplants/scaffolds, personalized treatment, and bioengineering for artificial implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomechanics; Knee osteotomy; Meniscal extrusion; Meniscus repair; Orthobiologics; Orthopedic medical devices; Posttraumatic osteoarthritis

Year:  2021        PMID: 33791890      PMCID: PMC8012449          DOI: 10.1186/s40634-021-00345-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Orthop        ISSN: 2197-1153


Background

The advancement of meniscus treatment through scientific research can be attributed to the current success of clinical treatment strategies for patients with meniscus-associated pathologies. Understanding the structure and function of the meniscus has played a pivotal role in the evolution of meniscus science [1, 16]. In 1884, Sutton referred to the menisci as ‘functionless’ remnants of intra-articular leg muscles [48]. In 1948, the first degenerative changes of the knee joint following meniscectomy were reported by Fairbank [11]. By 1982, Arnoczky and Warren recognized that the menisci were one of the ‘most important’ structures determining the future of the knee joint [1]. This century-long transition of the conceptualization of the meniscus from being ‘functionless’ to ‘most important’ was through the evolution of scientific research and innovation, particularly involving the discovery of the increased risk of joint degeneration associated with the loss of meniscus tissue [6, 39]. The state of meniscus science has advanced immensely with the evolution of scientific technologies, such as the advent of the arthroscope, which has led to an improved understanding of the meniscus for the longevity of the knee joint [17, 50]. As a result of both technological and research advancements, a paradigm shift from meniscus resection to meniscus repairs was established [2, 36, 45]. The goal of any technological evolution is to meet the needs and expectations of its users—this is the same goal with orthopaedic surgery and the evolution of meniscal treatment [3]. Thus, understanding the key focus areas for future research and development may lead to accelerated technological innovation in the field of meniscus science [10, 26]. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the main focus areas for research and development for furthering the state of meniscus science in 2021. We accomplished this by surveying a sample of the top scientific experts from an international consensus on meniscus science.

Methods

Survey development

This study was approved by the organizing committee members of the 5 International Conference on Meniscus Science and Surgery prior to being conducted. An electronic survey including 10 questions was sent in a blind fashion to all of the faculty members of the 5 International Conference on Meniscus Science and Surgery (Supplement 1). These faculty were primarily orthopedic surgeons. The survey questions were developed by the current authors according to previous trends in the literature regarding meniscus science and also by expert opinionated knowledge from years of clinical practice. A cover letter that accompanied the survey stated the purpose of the survey and ensured anonymity. All contacted participants had the opportunity to decline the survey. The survey was sent out and responses were collected from October 2020 to December 2020. Therapies for the prevention of posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) were defined as any intervention designed to avert or avoid OA development in high-risk patient populations. Symptom resolution therapies were defined as any therapy focused on reducing the symptomatology of patients with existing OA, including pain, stiffness, swelling, joint range-of-motion, muscle weakness, fatigue, joint instability, and pain-related psychological distress. Disease-modifying therapies were defined as any treatment that focused on retardation of OA (slowing the speed of progression), a complete halt in disease progression, or a reversal in disease progression (regeneration of targeted tissue).

Statistical analysis

Data were prospectively collected via an online survey tool (www.surveymonkey.com). They were extracted from the online survey database and summarized. Standard descriptive statistics were performed. Certain focus areas were ranked (low to high) among the respondents from a score of 1 (‘Not Helpful’) to a score of 5 (‘Most Helpful’). Weighted averages were then calculated to provide a statistical datapoint for these questions. For questions that were not weighted, multiple answers were allowed and thus the sum of such questions was not equal to 100%.

Results

Of the 82 faculty members, 76 (93%) from 18 different countries completed the survey (84% male, 16% female). Sixty-four (84%) individuals of the expert panel were orthopaedic surgeons while 12 (16%) were scientists/physiotherapists. The top 3 ranked focus areas of research and development for furthering the state of meniscus science were: meniscus repair (weighted average: 4.55), biologics (weighted average: 4.15), and surgical medical devices (weighted average: 4.00) (Table 1). Studying clinical outcome parameters (64%) was reported as the most ‘important’ focus area for improving clinical outcomes for meniscus repair. The reported most ‘valuable’ biologic for meniscus treatment was autologous blood (25%), including platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The reported least ‘valuable’ biologic for meniscus treatment was amniotic fluid (0%). However, the majority of respondents (28%) reported that none of the current biologics were ‘valuable’ for meniscal treatment (Fig. 1).
Table 1

Primary future research and development focus areas with weighted averagesa

Biologics4.15
Surgical medical devices4.00
Meniscus engineering3.84
Meniscus transplantation3.63
Nonsurgical medical devices2.63
Meniscus repair4.55

aRanking weighted averages: (1) not helpful—(2) low yield—(3) average yield—(4) moderate yield—(5) most helpful

Fig. 1

Type of biologics reported as currently ‘most valuable’ for meniscus treatment

Primary future research and development focus areas with weighted averagesa aRanking weighted averages: (1) not helpful—(2) low yield—(3) average yield—(4) moderate yield—(5) most helpful Type of biologics reported as currently ‘most valuable’ for meniscus treatment Addressing meniscal extrusion (52%) was reported as the main focus area for improving meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT), followed by improved patient selection (42%) and the utilization of biologics for improved graft incorporation and healing (42%). Osteotomy procedures (weighted average: 4.13), MAT (weighted average: 4.10), and biologics (weighted average: 3.83) were the top 3 ranked focus areas for treating patients with meniscal deficiency. Regarding meniscal preservation, meniscus repair (weighted average: 4.66), intra-articular repair devices (weighted average: 4.16), and biologics (weighted average: 3.97) were reported as the top ranked focus areas. The top ranked focus areas for treating patients with meniscus-associated PTOA were surgery (osteotomy, MAT, cartilage resurfacing; 64%), biologics (55%), pharmaceuticals (27%) and nonsurgical medical devices (unloader bracing and supports; 27%). The main focus area for developing new therapies in treating patients with meniscus-associated PTOA was prevention (64%), followed by the development of disease-modifying drugs (24%) and symptomatic management therapies (12%). The main current global research limitations for improving clinical outcomes in meniscus tear/deficient patient populations were lack of long-term clinical outcomes data (55%), lack of funding (33%), and lack of understanding the clinical problem (33%) (Fig. 2). The use of 3-D printing for meniscal transplants/scaffolds (61%), personalized medicine (52%), and artificial implants (including bioengineering, nanoparticles, and synthetic devices; 43%) were reported as the top ranked emerging medical technologies to have the greatest impact for furthering meniscus science (Fig. 3).
Fig. 2

Current global research limitations for improving clinical outcomes in meniscal tear/deficient patient populations

Fig. 3

Top ranked emerging medical technologies to have the greatest impact for furthering meniscus science

Current global research limitations for improving clinical outcomes in meniscal tear/deficient patient populations Top ranked emerging medical technologies to have the greatest impact for furthering meniscus science

Discussion

The most important findings of this survey were that the highest ranked future research and development focus areas included meniscus repair, biologics, osteotomy procedures, addressing meniscus extrusion, and the development of new therapies for the prevention of PTOA. Currently, the reported most ‘valuable’ type of biologic for meniscus treatment was PRP, while amniotic fluid was reported as least ‘valuable’. The main reported global research limitation was lack of long-term clinical outcomes data. Finally, the most promising emerging medical technologies for improving meniscus science in the twenty-first century were 3-D printing, personalized medicine, and bioengineering of artificial implants. This meniscus expert panel collectively suggests focusing future research and development on meniscal preservation through meniscus repair and the use of orthobiologics. Recent evidence including basic science and expert consensus statements have led to an improved understanding of treating meniscal lesions and use of biologic augmentation [4, 14, 20, 26, 28, 36, 40, 45, 47]. Both clinical outcomes data and animal models indicate promising results for meniscal repair and the potential for improved meniscal healing with biologic augmentation [23, 31, 35, 37]. Additionally, this survey suggests that future research and development should focus on intra-articular devices to further improve meniscal repair and enhance the delivery and sustainability of biologics inside the knee joint. Previous research has demonstrated the evolution of meniscal repair strategies, evident by the transition from inside-out techniques to all-inside repair devices [43, 49]. Continual development of biomedical devices involving meniscus repair and biologics delivery are of high importance based on this expert panel survey. This study demonstrated that biologics, specifically PRP, were consistently ranked as a leading focus area within each domain of meniscus science. This coincides well with current clinical practice apparent by the expanding use and global interest in utilizing biologics for treating an array of musculoskeletal disorders [34, 35, 42, 44, 47]. However, despite the increased interest and consensus for more research and development of biologics in meniscus science, the majority of respondents in this survey reported that biologics are currently not valuable for the treatment of meniscal injuries. This criticism is perhaps due to the unproven regenerative capacity of orthobiologics in clinical studies, despite promising evidence in basic science and animal models [31, 35, 44, 47, 52]. Therefore, the question remains “how” to advance from a technology development perspective. This should involve parallel discovery among clinicians and scientists with collaboration and investment from both the public and private sector. While new discoveries and sophisticated research methods will undoubtedly continue to contribute to the evolution of orthobiologics, the clinical utility of such therapeutics remain partially limited due to the limited cellular manipulation of biologic products for human use [22, 32, 33]. Therefore, one technological approach for improving the clinical efficacy of biologics in meniscus science is through the development of novel drug delivery platforms. Currently, the major challenges affecting successful delivery of biologics within joints includes rapid clearance of drugs due to passive release and lack of response to the body’s natural physiologic loading mechanisms [38]. Consequently, self-regulating drug delivery systems designed specifically for the mechanical environment of musculoskeletal tissues wherein physiologic feedback actively controls release kinetics have been developed as a solution to overcome this clinical barrier [29]. Controlled drug delivery for musculoskeletal environments show promise in a variety of orthopaedic conditions, including meniscal tears and the consequential degenerative cascade of PTOA [7, 25, 30]. This survey demonstrated high interest in the development of preventative therapies in patients with meniscus-associated PTOA. It is known that there is currently no treatment strategy that can prevent the progression of OA after injury and many treatment options may provide only partial symptomatic relief [41]. The clinical need for improved treatments in patients with meniscus tears and PTOA is clearly evident [12, 18, 20, 23, 24]; meanwhile the technology seeds in bioengineering show great promise for meniscus application in early development phases [13, 15, 21, 27, 29, 51]. Therefore, combining both a clinical need- and technology seed-driven approach may allow for accelerated innovation [8, 9, 19], especially in the domain of meniscus science and knee PTOA. Consequently, future research aimed to optimize biologically-targeted delivery systems may improve the efficacy of current orthobiologics while also assisting in the prevention of knee PTOA. Yet, preserving the meniscus through surgical repair (when indicated) remains the number one priority [12, 18, 23, 40, 45]. Addressing meniscal extrusion was a key focus area for research and development as indicated by this meniscus expert panel. Prior research has shown meniscal extrusion to be a determinant of success for corrective surgery in both meniscal repair and transplantation. Specifically, by addressing meniscal extrusion and successfully relocating or recentering the meniscus in its native anatomic position may best restore the load bearing and force reduction functions of the meniscus. Future research may focus on improving surgical techniques and developing medical technologies that allow for enhanced fixation of the meniscus to address this joint extrusion. Currently, the main global research limitation in the field of meniscus science is the lack of long-term clinical outcomes as reported by the expert panel. This survey suggests the need for long-term monitoring programs of meniscal tear patients including registry data and multi-center, international collaborations. The future of clinical care is not only dependent on emerging technology, such as 3-D printing and artificial implants, but also relies heavily on interdisciplinary collaboration and innovation [4, 5, 14, 27, 46]. There were limitations of this study inherent to that of a survey. Therefore, the subjective perspectives of the survey respondents cannot be validated with evidence-based recommendations. Furthermore, these practices may be adopted into future research studies for validation. Additionally, there may be inherent bias introduced as a result of an opinionated survey from primarily orthopedic surgeons, thus the results should be interpreted with caution.

Conclusions

This survey suggests that the future of meniscus science should be focused on meniscal preservation techniques through meniscus repair, addressing meniscal extrusion, and the use of orthobiologics. The lack of long-term clinical outcomes is the main reported research limitation globally for meniscus treatment. Future product development utilizing emerging medical technologies suggest the use of 3-D printing for meniscal transplants/scaffolds, personalized treatment, and bioengineering for artificial implants. Additional file 1 Supplement 1 The survey questionnaire with responses from expert meniscus consensus*.
  51 in total

1.  Knee joint changes after meniscectomy.

Authors:  T J FAIRBANK
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1948-11

2.  Save the meniscus.

Authors:  James H Lubowitz; Gary G Poehling
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  Platelet-rich plasma for open meniscal repair in young patients: any benefit?

Authors:  Nicolas Pujol; Etienne Salle De Chou; Philippe Boisrenoult; Philippe Beaufils
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-07       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  The Role of Orthobiologics in the Management of Osteoarthritis and Focal Cartilage Defects.

Authors:  Benjamin J Sherman; Jorge Chahla; Jason Glowney; Rachel M Frank
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 1.390

5.  Meniscus Root Repair vs Meniscectomy or Nonoperative Management to Prevent Knee Osteoarthritis After Medial Meniscus Root Tears: Clinical and Economic Effectiveness.

Authors:  Scott C Faucett; Benjamin Peter Geisler; Jorge Chahla; Aaron J Krych; Peter R Kurzweil; Abigail M Garner; Shan Liu; Robert F LaPrade; Jan B Pietzsch
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 6.202

6.  Editorial Commentary: Orthobiologics-The Evolution From Symptom to Structural Modification in the Treatment of Articular Cartilage Defects.

Authors:  Ron Gilat; Brian J Cole
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  Comparative Outcomes of All-Inside Versus Inside-Out Repair of Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Authors:  Brian T Samuelsen; Nicholas R Johnson; Mario Hevesi; Bruce A Levy; Diane L Dahm; Michael J Stuart; Aaron J Krych
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-06-15

8.  Current Trends Among US Surgeons in the Identification, Treatment, and Time of Repair for Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesions at the Time of ACL Surgery.

Authors:  Nicholas N DePhillipo; Lars Engebretsen; Robert F LaPrade
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-02-22

Review 9.  Management of traumatic meniscus tears: the 2019 ESSKA meniscus consensus.

Authors:  Sebastian Kopf; Philippe Beaufils; Michael T Hirschmann; Niccolò Rotigliano; Matthieu Ollivier; Helder Pereira; Rene Verdonk; Nikica Darabos; Panagiotis Ntagiopoulos; David Dejour; Romain Seil; Roland Becker
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Effect of Oral Losartan on Orthobiologics: Implications for Platelet-Rich Plasma and Bone Marrow Concentrate-A Rabbit Study.

Authors:  Gilberto Y Nakama; Sabrina Gonzalez; Polina Matre; Xiaodong Mu; Kaitlyn E Whitney; Hajime Utsunomiya; Justin W Arner; Marc J Philippon; Sudheer Ravuri; Johnny Huard
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 5.923

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Meniscus regeneration by 3D printing technologies: Current advances and future perspectives.

Authors:  Elena Stocco; Andrea Porzionato; Enrico De Rose; Silvia Barbon; Raffaele De Caro; Veronica Macchi
Journal:  J Tissue Eng       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 7.813

2.  Three-Dimensional-Printed Scaffolds for Meniscus Tissue Engineering: Opportunity for the Future in the Orthopaedic World.

Authors:  Angelo V Vasiliadis; Nikolaos Koukoulias; Konstantinos Katakalos
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2021-12-02

3.  Meniscectomy is still a frequent orthopedic procedure: a pending need for education on the meniscus treatment possibilities.

Authors:  Paweł Bąkowski; Kamilla Bąkowska-Żywicka; Kinga Ciemniewska-Gorzela; Tomasz Piontek
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 4.342

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.