» Articles » PMID: 36033190

Arthroscopic Medial Meniscal Root Reconstruction With Gracilis Autograft Is Safe and Improves 2-Year Postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes

Overview
Date 2022 Aug 29
PMID 36033190
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To describe patient-reported clinical outcomes and complications of anatomic medial meniscal root reconstruction with gracilis autograft.

Methods: Data on patients who underwent arthroscopic medial meniscal root reconstruction with gracilis autograft were prospectively collected between 2017 and 2021 and retrospectively reviewed. The inclusion criteria were symptomatic posterior medial meniscal LaPrade type 2 root tears with no more than Outerbridge grade 2 chondrosis of any knee compartment with a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. Patients with ligamentous instability and those with Workers' Compensation status were excluded. Patient-reported outcomes (12-item Short Form Survey [SF-12], visual analog scale [VAS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index [WOMAC], and Lysholm scores) were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively and were scored and recorded both preoperatively and at postoperative intervals. Data were analyzed using cubic spline regression models. The study was approved by the University of South Carolina Institutional Review Board.

Results: A consecutive series of 27 patients treated by a single surgeon were evaluated. Twenty-one patients were included for data analysis (4 were excluded per criteria and 2 were lost to follow-up) with an average age of 48.1 years (range, 16-63 years). There were 18 female and 3 male patients. The average follow-up time was 25.2 months (range, 12-42 months). At the postoperative time points captured by the data examined, improvements in Lysholm, WOMAC, VAS, and SF-12 physical component summary scores were found to be statistically significant ( < .001, 95% confidence interval). Improvements in SF-12 mental component summary scores, however, did not reach the level of statistical significance ( = .262). Body mass index greater than 35 and age greater than 50 years were not found to be negative predictors of outcomes. Average patient-reported outcomes at 2 years' follow-up improved from preoperatively as follows: Lysholm score, from 50 to 82.9; WOMAC score, from 53.9 to 87.4; and VAS score, from 5.1 to 1.2. No serious complications were observed.

Conclusions: Patients undergoing posterior medial meniscal root reconstruction showed statistically significant improvements in Lysholm, WOMAC, SF-12 physical component summary, and VAS scores but not SF-12 mental component summary scores at short-term follow-up. No serious complications or clinical failures occurred, and no patients required revision surgery.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV, case series.

Citing Articles

Transtibial Pullout for Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Reconstruction With Split-Gracilis Autograft.

Franco P, Jolly A, Abermann E, Fink C, Hoser C Arthrosc Tech. 2024; 13(11):103107.

PMID: 39711896 PMC: 11662870. DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2024.103107.


Meniscus Reconstruction Using Autologous Tendon Combined With Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy: A Technique to Achieve Rigid Fixation and Avoid Interference Between Locking Screws and Tibial Bone Tunnel.

Takagawa S, Takeuchi R, Kobayashi N, Yukizawa Y, Hirotomi K, Higashihira S Arthrosc Tech. 2024; 13(10):103064.

PMID: 39479045 PMC: 11519849. DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2024.103064.


Transosseous Fixation with Suspensory Fixation System on Medial Meniscus Root Tears.

Paksoy A, Sarikaya G, Kose M, Ollivier M, Kocaoglu B Arthrosc Tech. 2023; 12(11):e1979-e1984.

PMID: 38094974 PMC: 10714294. DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2023.07.016.


Medial meniscus posterior root tear reconstructed with gracilis autograft improve healing rate and patient reported outcome measures.

Li H, Nie S, Lan M BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1):1094.

PMID: 36517773 PMC: 9749208. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-06067-1.

References
1.
Ware Jr J, Kosinski M, Keller S . A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996; 34(3):220-33. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. View

2.
Fairbank T . Knee joint changes after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1948; 30B(4):664-70. View

3.
Li C, Hu X, Meng Q, Zhang X, Zhu J, Dai L . The potential of using semitendinosus tendon as autograft in rabbit meniscus reconstruction. Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1):7033. PMC: 5539314. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-07166-z. View

4.
LaPrade R, Ho C, James E, Crespo B, LaPrade C, Matheny L . Diagnostic accuracy of 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of meniscus posterior root pathology. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 23(1):152-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3395-5. View

5.
Feucht M, Grande E, Brunhuber J, Burgkart R, Imhoff A, Braun S . Biomechanical evaluation of different suture techniques for arthroscopic transtibial pull-out repair of posterior medial meniscus root tears. Am J Sports Med. 2013; 41(12):2784-90. DOI: 10.1177/0363546513502464. View