Survey Results Concerning Current Trends in Meniscus Repair Indications and Preferences from Members of the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine (PRiSM) Society

Abstract

Meniscus repair has increased in frequency, especially among surgeons who focus on youth sports injuries. The aim of this study was to determine current trends in meniscus repair among a specific subset of meniscus repair surgeons. A cross-sectional survey utilizing several clinical vignettes was administered to orthopaedic surgeon members of the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine (PRiSM) Society to investigate surgeon experience and training, number of meniscus repair procedures performed, and surgical and rehabilitation preferences. A statistical analysis of the responses was performed to determine associations between years in practice or type of fellowship training and the number of meniscus repair procedures performed, surgical indications, and rehabilitation preferences. The response rate to various questions ranged from 61.5 (59/96) to 63.5% (61/96). In all vignettes, a majority favored repair as well as some degree of weight-bearing and range-of-motion restrictions. Surgeons who had been in practice for 6 to 10 years performed significantly more meniscus repairs per year than those who had been in practice for greater than 20 years (p = 0.009) and those who had been in practice for 0 to 5 years (p = 0.05). Surgeons who had been in practice for greater than 20 years performed a significantly higher percentage of meniscectomies relative to meniscus repairs, compared with those in practice for 0 to 5 years (p = 0.002) or 6 to 10 years (p = 0.0003). When surgeons were grouped into those with less than 10 years of experience and those with greater than 10 years of experience, the former group performed a significantly higher number of meniscus repairs relative to meniscectomies than the latter group of surgeons (p < 0.0001). Less experienced surgeons are more likely to perform meniscus repair than meniscectomy, but all surgeons surveyed had a general preference for repair in all clinical vignettes. Repair technique preferences as well as rehabilitation protocols varied widely among surgeons.

Keywords

meniscus repair - meniscectomy - all inside meniscus repair - inside-out meniscus repair - outside in meniscus repair

Authors' Contribution

J.L.P. contributed to survey creation, manuscript writing, and data analysis. J.A.S. contributed to survey creation and manuscript writing. B.H. and PRiSM Meniscus RIG contributed to survey creation. R.H. contributed to statistical analysis.

Publication History

Received: 27 June 2023

Accepted: 16 July 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
17 July 2024

Article published online:
22 August 2024

• References

• 1 Cruz Jr AI, Gao B, Ganley TJ. et al. Trends in concomitant meniscal surgery among pediatric patients undergoing ACL reconstruction: an analysis of ABOS part II candidates from 2000 to 2016. Orthop J Sports Med 2019; 7 (09) 2325967119869848
• 2 Wasserburger JN, Shultz CL, Hankins DA. et al. Long-term national trends of arthroscopic meniscal repair and debridement. Am J Sports Med 2021; 49 (06) 1530-1537
• 3 Elmallah R, Jones LC, Malloch L, Barrett GR. A meta-analysis of arthroscopic meniscal repair: inside-out versus outside-in versus all-inside techniques. J Knee Surg 2019; 32 (08) 750-757
• 4 Petersen W, Karpinski K, Bierke S, Müller Rath R, Häner M. A systematic review about long-term results after meniscus repair. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2022; 142 (05) 835-844
• 5 Spang Iii RC, Nasr MC, Mohamadi A, DeAngelis JP, Nazarian A, Ramappa AJ. Rehabilitation following meniscal repair: a systematic review. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med 2018; 4 (01) e000212
• 6 Smoak JB, Matthews JR, Vinod AV, Kluczynski MA, Bisson LJ. An up-to-date review of the meniscus literature: a systematic summary of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Orthop J Sports Med 2020; 8 (09) 2325967120950306
• 7 Tagliero AJ, Kennedy NI, Leland DP. et al. Meniscus repairs in the adolescent population-safe and reliable outcomes: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020; 28 (11) 3587-3596
• 8 Arno S, Hadley S, Campbell KA. et al. The effect of arthroscopic partial medial meniscectomy on tibiofemoral stability. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (01) 73-79
• 9 Freutel M, Seitz AM, Ignatius A, Dürselen L. Influence of partial meniscectomy on attachment forces, superficial strain and contact mechanics in porcine knee joints. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (01) 74-82
• 10 Brown MJ, Farrell JP, Kluczynski MA, Marzo JM. Biomechanical effects of a horizontal medial meniscal tear and subsequent leaflet resection. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (04) 850-854
• 11 Lee SJ, Aadalen KJ, Malaviya P. et al. Tibiofemoral contact mechanics after serial medial meniscectomies in the human cadaveric knee. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34 (08) 1334-1344
• 12 Bolano LE, Grana WA. Isolated arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. Functional radiographic evaluation at five years. Am J Sports Med 1993; 21 (03) 432-437
• 13 Fairbank TJ. Knee joint changes after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1948; 30B [phone]
• 14 Wu IT, Hevesi M, Desai VS. et al. Comparative outcomes of radial and bucket-handle meniscal tear repair: a propensity-matched analysis. Am J Sports Med 2018; 46 (11) 2653-2660
• 15 Tsujii A, Yonetani Y, Kinugasa K. et al. Outcomes more than 2 years after meniscal repair for longitudinal tears of the lateral meniscus combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2021; 49 (03) 684-692
• 16 Ardizzone CA, Houck DA, McCartney DW, Vidal AF, Frank RM. All-inside repair of bucket-handle meniscal tears: clinical outcomes and prognostic factors. Am J Sports Med 2020; 48 (13) 3386-3393
• 17 Grant JA, Wilde J, Miller BS, Bedi A. Comparison of inside-out and all-inside techniques for the repair of isolated meniscal tears: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (02) 459-468
• 18 Samuelsen BT, Johnson NR, Hevesi M. et al. Comparative outcomes of all-inside versus inside-out repair of bucket-handle meniscal tears: a propensity-matched analysis. Orthop J Sports Med 2018; 6 (06) 2325967118779045
• 19 Fillingham YA, Riboh JC, Erickson BJ, Bach Jr BR, Yanke AB. Inside-out versus all-inside repair of isolated meniscal tears: an updated systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (01) 234-242
• 20 Beamer BS, Walley KC, Okajima S. et al. Changes in contact area in meniscus horizontal cleavage tears subjected to repair and resection. Arthroscopy 2017; 33 (03) 617-624
• 21 Masoudi A, Beamer BS, Harlow ER. et al. Biomechanical evaluation of an all-inside suture-based device for repairing longitudinal meniscal tears. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (03) 428-434
• 22 Branch EA, Milchteim C, Aspey BS, Liu W, Saliman JD, Anz AW. Biomechanical comparison of arthroscopic repair constructs for radial tears of the meniscus. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (09) 2270-2276
• 23 Mhaskar VA. Alternative all-inside technique of repairing a vertical meniscus tear. Arthrosc Tech 2020; 9 (08) e1181-e1189
• 24 Saliman JD. The circumferential compression stitch for meniscus repair. Arthrosc Tech 2013; 2 (03) e257-e264
• 25 Moran TE, Awowale JT, Werner BC, Fox MA, Miller MD. Associated morbidity after the percutaneous release of the medial collateral ligament for knee arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 2020; 36 (03) 891-900
• 26 Moran TE, Demers AJ, Shank KM, Awowale JT, Miller MD. Percutaneous medial collateral ligament release improves medial compartment access during knee arthroscopy. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2020; 3 (01) e105-e114