AI Article Synopsis
- The study aimed to compare clinical and graft survivorship, along with patient-reported outcomes, between two types of meniscus allograft transplantation: lateral (LMAT) and medial (MMAT).
- It included 299 knees over a follow-up period averaging around 63 months, finding a small number of clinical and graft failures in both groups but no significant differences in outcomes.
- The conclusion was that both LMAT and MMAT showed similar results regarding survivorship and patient-reported outcomes, indicating that the type of transplantation might not influence the success of the procedure.
Article Abstract
Purpose: To compare the differences with respect to clinical and graft survivorship and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between lateral (LMAT) and medial (MMAT) meniscus allograft transplantation.
Methods: Patients having a primary MAT between 1998 and 2016 were enrolled. The inclusion criteria were (1) patients who had a minimum 2-year follow-up and (2) patients who had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) >2 years after surgery. Knees with localized grade 4 articular cartilage lesions >3 cm at the time of MAT were excluded. Clinical failure was defined as follows: modified Lysholm score <65, meniscectomy >50% of the graft, meniscectomy to the meniscocapsular junction zone, conversion to revision MAT, or realignment osteotomy or arthroplasty. Graft failure was defined as follows: tears involving >50% of the graft or unhealed peripheral rim observed on MRI. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test was used to compare survivorship between LMAT and MMAT. Patient-reported outcomes were compared based on the Hospital for Special Surgery, modified Lysholm, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores collected preoperatively and at the final follow-up.
Results: A total of 299 knees (249 LMAT, 50 MMAT, mean age 33.0 ± 9.8 years) were included. Twenty clinical [2 MMAT (4.0%), 18 LMAT (7.2%)] and 24 graft [2 MMAT (4.0%), 22 LMAT (8.8%)] failures were identified. The mean clinical follow-up period was 63.1 ± 43.1 months (range 2 to 248), and MRI follow-up period was 62.6 ± 43.8 months (range 2 to 248). No significant differences in clinical and graft survivorship were found between the LMAT and MMAT groups (P = .481, P = .271, respectively). PROs preoperatively and at last follow-up also showed no significant difference between the groups.
Conclusion: No significant differences in clinical survivorship, graft survivorship, and PROs were found between the LMAT and MMAT groups.
Level Of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.07.025 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!