PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary on the current literature and trends regarding use of the inside-out approach to meniscus repair. Additionally, the paper describes the authors preferred techniques for inside-out meniscus repair utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral exposures. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been a substantial increase in recent publications regarding meniscus repair. However, comparisons regarding the optimal repair technique have not been conclusive. Despite the recent increase in use of all-inside devices, multiple investigations with short-to-mid-term follow-up have demonstrated similar rates of meniscus healing between inside-out and all-inside repair techniques. Similarly, current literature describes comparable failure rates of around 20%. There are variations in the profile of complications, with all-inside devices having more implant-related complications and inside-out techniques with higher neurovascular injuries. Inside-out meniscus repair is a versatile, cost-effective technique that remains the gold standard for management of most meniscus tear patterns. Through a thoughtful approach, efficient suture retrieval and repair can be performed while protecting critical neurovascular structures. All-inside meniscus repair devices have increased in popularity and surgeon access, but this technique is not without limitations and comparisons to inside-out meniscus repair demonstrates equivocal outcomes.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary on the current literature and trends regarding use of the inside-out approach to meniscus repair. Additionally, the paper describes the authors preferred techniques for inside-out meniscus repair utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral exposures. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been a substantial increase in recent publications regarding meniscus repair. However, comparisons regarding the optimal repair technique have not been conclusive. Despite the recent increase in use of all-inside devices, multiple investigations with short-to-mid-term follow-up have demonstrated similar rates of meniscus healing between inside-out and all-inside repair techniques. Similarly, current literature describes comparable failure rates of around 20%. There are variations in the profile of complications, with all-inside devices having more implant-related complications and inside-out techniques with higher neurovascular injuries. Inside-out meniscus repair is a versatile, cost-effective technique that remains the gold standard for management of most meniscus tear patterns. Through a thoughtful approach, efficient suture retrieval and repair can be performed while protecting critical neurovascular structures. All-inside meniscus repair devices have increased in popularity and surgeon access, but this technique is not without limitations and comparisons to inside-out meniscus repair demonstrates equivocal outcomes.
Authors: Mohamed Jarraya; Frank W Roemer; Martin Englund; Michel D Crema; Heather I Gale; Daichi Hayashi; Jeffrey N Katz; Ali Guermazi Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Daniel M Buckland; Patrick Sadoghi; Matthias D Wimmer; Patrick Vavken; Geert I Pagenstert; Victor Valderrabano; Claudio Rosso Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Zachariah Gene Wing Ow; Michelle Shi Ni Law; Cheng Han Ng; Aaron J Krych; Daniel B F Saris; Pedro Debieux; Keng Lin Wong; Heng An Lin Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2021-05-29 Impact factor: 4.772