Meniscal Radial Tears Repaired With All-Inside and Inside-Out Techniques Result in Improved Clinical Outcome Scores, but Inside-Out Repairs May Be Associated With Higher Failure Rates Clinically and on Second-Look Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), failure, and healing rates after all-inside (AI) repair versus inside-out (IO) repair for the treatment of meniscal radial tears.

Methods: A literature search was performed according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the Scopus, PubMed, and Embase computerized databases. Level of Evidence I through IV human clinical studies evaluating PROs and/or the incidence of failure and healing after AI versus IO repairs for meniscal radial tears were included. Clinical failure was defined by the presence of joint-line tenderness; a positive McMurray test; and mechanical symptoms, such as locking, catching, or giving way. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria and the Modified Coleman Methodology Score.

Results: Ten studies published from 2008 to 2023 comprising 205 patients were identified, including 142 patients who underwent AI repair and 63 patients who underwent IO repair for radial meniscus tears. Postoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores ranged from 90.8 to 95.6 and 5.7 to 8.2, respectively, in the AI repair group, compared with 86.9 to 94.2 and 6 to 7.5, respectively, in the IO repair group. All patients exceeded published values for minimal clinically important difference for the Lysholm score. Clinical failure ranged from 0% to 40% in the AI group and 0% to 62.5% in the IO group. Healing assessments on second-look arthroscopy revealed failure rates ranging from 0% to 13.3% in the AI group and 0% to 39% in the IO group. Complete and partial healing ranged from 28.6% to 92.3% in the AI group and from 25% to 70% in the IO group. Chondral damage on second-look arthroscopy ranged from 0% to 95% in the IO group and 0% to 57.7% in the AI group. Postoperative complications ranged from 0% to 2% within the AI group, whereas no complications were reported in the IO group. No implant-related complications were reported in any study group.

Conclusions: Both all-inside and inside-out repairs for meniscal radial tears demonstrated improved PROs; however, current literature suggests that the IO technique may have higher failure rates both clinically and on second-look arthroscopy.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.