Kazuya Nishino1, Yusuke Hashimoto2, Ken Iida1, Takuya Kinoshita1, Hiroaki Nakamura3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka, 545-8585, Japan. hussyyomu@omu.ac.jp. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahi-machi, Abeno-ku, Osaka, 545-8585, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the amount of extrusion of the discoid lateral meniscus (DLM), which was symptomatic and required surgery, with normal meniscuses and asymptomatic DLMs and examine factors associated with the extrusion of symptomatic DLM. METHODS: Medical records of participants with DLM or normal lateral meniscus (LM) were retrospectively reviewed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). DLM cases were divided into symptomatic and asymptomatic groups. The midbody meniscal extrusion was measured using mid-coronal MRI. The association between meniscal extrusion and MRI findings, including the meniscofemoral ligament, meniscotibial ligament (MTL), intrameniscal signal intensity of the peripheral rim, meniscal shift, and skeletal maturity, was evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-six knees with DLM (63 symptomatic) were included. The control group included 31 patients. The symptomatic group showed significantly greater meniscal extrusion (mean ± standard deviation symptomatic DLM: 1.0 ± 1.1 mm, asymptomatic DLM: 0.1 ± 0.4 mm, and normal LM: 0.3 ± 0.6 mm, P < 0.001) and had a significantly higher incidence of MTL loosening (P = 0.02) and intrameniscal signal (P < 0.001) than the other two groups. In the symptomatic group, multivariable linear regression analysis showed that MTL loosening [β = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.86, P < 0.001] and intrameniscal signal (β = 0.49, 95% CI 0.09-0.90, P = 0.002) were independent associated factors. CONCLUSIONS: LM extrusion was significantly more common in patients with symptomatic DLM than in those with asymptomatic DLM or a normal LM. MTL loosening and intrameniscal high-signal intensity on MRI were independently associated with meniscal extrusion. These findings help explain the pathogenesis and diagnosis of symptomatic DLM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the amount of extrusion of the discoid lateral meniscus (DLM), which was symptomatic and required surgery, with normal meniscuses and asymptomatic DLMs and examine factors associated with the extrusion of symptomatic DLM. METHODS: Medical records of participants with DLM or normal lateral meniscus (LM) were retrospectively reviewed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). DLM cases were divided into symptomatic and asymptomatic groups. The midbody meniscal extrusion was measured using mid-coronal MRI. The association between meniscal extrusion and MRI findings, including the meniscofemoral ligament, meniscotibial ligament (MTL), intrameniscal signal intensity of the peripheral rim, meniscal shift, and skeletal maturity, was evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-six knees with DLM (63 symptomatic) were included. The control group included 31 patients. The symptomatic group showed significantly greater meniscal extrusion (mean ± standard deviation symptomatic DLM: 1.0 ± 1.1 mm, asymptomatic DLM: 0.1 ± 0.4 mm, and normal LM: 0.3 ± 0.6 mm, P < 0.001) and had a significantly higher incidence of MTL loosening (P = 0.02) and intrameniscal signal (P < 0.001) than the other two groups. In the symptomatic group, multivariable linear regression analysis showed that MTL loosening [β = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.86, P < 0.001] and intrameniscal signal (β = 0.49, 95% CI 0.09-0.90, P = 0.002) were independent associated factors. CONCLUSIONS: LM extrusion was significantly more common in patients with symptomatic DLM than in those with asymptomatic DLM or a normal LM. MTL loosening and intrameniscal high-signal intensity on MRI were independently associated with meniscal extrusion. These findings help explain the pathogenesis and diagnosis of symptomatic DLM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Andrew G Geeslin; David Civitarese; Travis Lee Turnbull; Grant J Dornan; Fernando A Fuso; Robert F LaPrade Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Ozgur Ahmet Atay; Murat Pekmezci; Mahmut Nedim Doral; Mustafa Fevzi Sargon; Mehmet Ayvaz; Darren L Johnson Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2007-01-23 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Hee Kyung Kim; Sahar Shiraj; Christopher G Anton; Paul S Horn; Bernard J Dardzinski Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 3.959
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: David G Deckey; Sailesh Tummala; Jens T Verhey; Jeffrey D Hassebrock; Donald Dulle; Mark D Miller; Anikar Chhabra Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-11-26
Authors: Sarah C Foreman; Yao Liu; Michael C Nevitt; Jan Neumann; Gabby B Joseph; Nancy E Lane; Charles E McCulloch; Thomas M Link Journal: Cartilage Date: 2020-06-21 Impact factor: 3.117