Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee arthritis and meniscal tears: a clinical practice guideline.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Siemieniuk RAC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5426368 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee arthritis and meniscal tears: a clinical practice guideline.
Siemieniuk Reed A C RAC Harris Ian A IA Agoritsas Thomas T Poolman Rudolf W RW Brignardello-Petersen Romina R Van de Velde Stijn S Buchbinder Rachelle R Englund Martin M Lytvyn Lyubov L Quinlan Casey C Helsingen Lise L Knutsen Gunnar G Olsen Nina Rydland NR Macdonald Helen H Hailey Louise L Wilson Hazel M HM Lydiatt Anne A Kristiansen Annette A
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20170510
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8892839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives To compare patient reported outcomes from before surgery to 52 weeks after surgery between individuals undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for traumatic meniscal tears and those for degenerative meniscal tears.Design Comparative prospective cohort study.Setting Four public orthopaedic departments in the Region of Southern Denmark. Participants were recruited between 1 February 2013 and 31 January 2014, and at one of the original four hospitals from 1 February 2014 to 31 January 2015.Participants Individuals selected from Knee Arthroscopy Cohort Southern Denmark, aged 18-55, and undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a traumatic or degenerative meniscal tear (defined by a combination of age and symptom onset).Interventions Both participant groups underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a meniscal tear, with operating surgeons recording relevant information on knee pathology. Patient reported outcomes were recorded via online questionnaires.Main outcome measures Primary outcome was the average between-group difference in change on four of five subscales of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS). The four subscales covered pain, symptoms, sport and recreational function, and quality of life (KOOS4). A 95% confidence interval excluding differences greater than 10 KOOS points between groups was interpreted as absence of a clinically meaningful difference. Analyses adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index.Results 397 eligible adults (42% women) with a traumatic or degenerative meniscal tear (n=141, mean age 38.7 years (standard deviation 10.9); n=256, 46.6 years (6.4); respectively) were included in the main analysis. At 52 weeks after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 55 (14%) patients were lost to follow-up. Statistically, participants with degenerative meniscal tears had a significantly larger improvement in KOOS4 scores than those with traumatic tears (adjusted between-group difference -5.1 (95% confidence interval -8.9 to -1.3); P=0.008). In the analysis including KOOS4 score at all time points, a significant time-by-group interaction was observed in both the unadjusted (P=0.025) and adjusted analysis (P=0.024), indicating better self-reported outcomes in participants with degenerative tears. However, the difference between groups was at no time point considered clinically meaningful.Conclusions These results question the current tenet that patients with traumatic meniscal tears experience greater improvements in patient reported outcomes after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy than patients with degenerative tears.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01871272.
| S-EPMC5421436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArthroscopic surgery for degenerative meniscal tears is a commonly performed procedure, yet the role of conservative treatment for these patients is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of arthroscopic meniscal débridement in patients with knee pain in the setting of mild or no concurrent osteoarthritis of the knee in comparison with nonoperative or sham treatments.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1946 to Jan. 20, 2014. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts for eligibility. We assessed risk of bias for all included studies and pooled outcomes using a random-effects model. Outcomes (i.e., function and pain relief) were dichotomized to short-term (< 6 mo) and long-term (< 2 yr) data.ResultsSeven RCTs (n = 805 patients) were included in this review. The pooled treatment effect of arthroscopic surgery did not show a significant or minimally important difference (MID) between treatment arms for long-term functional outcomes (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.10 to 0.23). Short-term functional outcomes between groups were significant but did not exceed the threshold for MID (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48). Arthroscopic surgery did not result in a significant improvement in pain scores in the short term (mean difference [MD] 0.20, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.26) or in the long term (MD -0.06, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.15). Statistical heterogeneity was low to moderate for the outcomes.InterpretationThere is moderate evidence to suggest that there is no benefit to arthroscopic meniscal débridement for degenerative meniscal tears in comparison with nonoperative or sham treatments in middle-aged patients with mild or no concomitant osteoarthritis. A trial of nonoperative management should be the first-line treatment for such patients.
| S-EPMC4188648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Arthroscopic treatment is the treatment of choice in bucket-handle meniscal tears (BHMTs). Following BHMT, however, surgery failure rates are approximately 20% in the literature. Achieving the healing of BHMT is difficult. This is worse in chronic situations because the torn meniscus is deformed, leading to nonanatomical reduction. Some authors have reported greater failure rates, especially in the early postoperative period. In isolated BHMTs, the failure rate is greater because of inadequate and incomplete repairs due to the tight medial compartment. Multiple techniques for possible reduction of failure rate have been described. We describe an arthroscopic technique for treating chronic isolated BHMT using the technique of subcutaneously releasing the posterior fibers of the medial collateral ligament to provide adequate space for arthroscopy, meniscal reduction, and repair. A combined inside-out and all-inside repair technique was used to enhance anatomic reduction, stable fixation, surface fixation (rather than the usual suture-points fixation), and biologic healing in repairable chronic BHMTs.
| S-EPMC7917027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThere is a paucity of high-quality evidence about the long-term effects (ie, 3-5 years and beyond) of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy vs exercise-based physical therapy for patients with degenerative meniscal tears.ObjectivesTo compare the 5-year effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and exercise-based physical therapy on patient-reported knee function and progression of knee osteoarthritis in patients with a degenerative meniscal tear.Design, setting, and participantsA noninferiority, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in the orthopedic departments of 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 321 patients aged 45 to 70 years with a degenerative meniscal tear participated. Data collection took place between July 12, 2013, and December 4, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomly allocated to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or 16 sessions of exercise-based physical therapy.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was patient-reported knee function (International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (range, 0 [worst] to 100 [best]) during 5 years of follow-up based on the intention-to-treat principle, with a noninferiority threshold of 11 points. The secondary outcome was progression in knee osteoarthritis shown on radiographic images in both treatment groups.ResultsOf 321 patients (mean [SD] age, 58 [6.6] years; 161 women [50.2%]), 278 patients (87.1%) completed the 5-year follow-up with a mean follow-up time of 61.8 months (range, 58.8-69.5 months). From baseline to 5-year follow-up, the mean (SD) improvement was 29.6 (18.7) points in the surgery group and 25.1 (17.8) points in the physical therapy group. The crude between-group difference was 3.5 points (95% CI, 0.7-6.3 points; P < .001 for noninferiority). The 95% CI did not exceed the noninferiority threshold of 11 points. Comparable rates of progression of radiographic-demonstrated knee osteoarthritis were noted between both treatments.Conclusions and relevanceIn this noninferiority randomized clinical trial after 5 years, exercise-based physical therapy remained noninferior to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for patient-reported knee function. Physical therapy should therefore be the preferred treatment over surgery for degenerative meniscal tears. These results can assist in the development and updating of current guideline recommendations about treatment for patients with a degenerative meniscal tear.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01850719.
| S-EPMC9270699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Needle arthroscopy has experienced a substantial increase in image quality due to technical innovation, which has brought needle arthroscopic interventional possibilities along. Repair of meniscal tears is gaining popularity relative to meniscectomy and may be such a procedure that is suitable for needle arthroscopy. We here present a needle arthroscopic technique for all-inside repair of meniscal tears in the red zone and red-white zone. With the use of local anesthesia only, the procedure is easy to perform for the surgeon and well-tolerable for the patient. Compared with conventional approaches to meniscal repair, needle arthroscopy may result in improved patient experience, decreased soft-tissue trauma, speedier recovery, and less need for personnel and hospital facilities. Combined, the advantages may lead to decreased overall costs as well.
| S-EPMC8417447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is unknown whether the treatment effects of partial meniscectomy and physical therapy differ when focusing on activities most valued by patients with degenerative meniscal tears.PurposeTo compare partial meniscectomy with physical therapy in patients with a degenerative meniscal tear, focusing on patients' most important functional limitations as the outcome.Study designRandomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.MethodsThis study is part of the Cost-effectiveness of Early Surgery versus Conservative Treatment with Optional Delayed Meniscectomy for Patients over 45 years with non-obstructive meniscal tears (ESCAPE) trial, a multicenter noninferiority randomized controlled trial conducted in 9 orthopaedic hospital departments in the Netherlands. The ESCAPE trial included 321 patients aged between 45 and 70 years with a symptomatic, magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed meniscal tear. Exclusion criteria were severe osteoarthritis, body mass index >35 kg/m2, locking of the knee, and prior knee surgery or knee instability due to an anterior or posterior cruciate ligament rupture. This study compared partial meniscectomy with physical therapy consisting of a supervised incremental exercise protocol of 16 sessions over 8 weeks. The main outcome measure was the Dutch-language equivalent of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), a secondary outcome measure of the ESCAPE trial. We used crude and adjusted linear mixed-model analyses to reveal the between-group differences over 24 months. We calculated the minimal important change for the PSFS using an anchor-based method.ResultsAfter 24 months, 286 patients completed the follow-up. The partial meniscectomy group (n = 139) improved on the PSFS by a mean of 4.8 ± 2.6 points (from 6.8 ± 1.9 to 2.0 ± 2.2), and the physical therapy group (n = 147) improved by a mean of 4.0 ± 3.1 points (from 6.7 ± 2.0 to 2.7 ± 2.5). The crude overall between-group difference showed a -0.6-point difference (95% CI, -1.0 to -0.2; P = .004) in favor of the partial meniscectomy group. This improvement was statistically significant but not clinically meaningful, as the calculated minimal important change was 2.5 points on an 11-point scale.ConclusionBoth interventions were associated with a clinically meaningful improvement regarding patients' most important functional limitations. Although partial meniscectomy was associated with a statistically larger improvement at some follow-up time points, the difference compared with physical therapy was small and clinically not meaningful at any follow-up time point.RegistrationNCT01850719 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier) and NTR3908 (the Netherlands Trial Register).
| S-EPMC7607803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDespite recent studies suggesting arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is not more effective than physical therapy (PT), the procedure is still frequently performed in patients with meniscal tears.ObjectiveTo assess whether PT is noninferior to APM for improving patient-reported knee function in patients with meniscal tears.Design, setting, and participantsNoninferiority, multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted in 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants were aged 45 to 70 years with nonobstructive meniscal tears (ie, no locking of the knee joint). Patients with knee instability, severe osteoarthritis, and body mass index greater than 35 were excluded. Recruitment took place between July 17, 2013, and November 4, 2015. Participants were followed up for 24 months (final participant follow-up, October 11, 2017).InterventionsThree hundred twenty-one participants were randomly assigned to APM (n = 159) or a predefined PT protocol (n = 162). The PT protocol consisted of 16 sessions of exercise therapy over 8 weeks focused on coordination and closed kinetic chain strength exercises.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change in patient-reported knee function on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (range, 0 to 100; from worse to best) from baseline over a 24-month follow-up period. The noninferiority margin was defined as a difference between treatment groups of 8 points and was assessed with a 1-sided α of .025. The primary analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle.ResultsAmong 321 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 58 [6.6] years; 161 women [50%]), 289 (90%) completed the trial (161 women and 158 men). In the PT group, 47 participants (29%) had APM during the 24-month follow-up period, and 8 participants randomized to APM (5%) did not have APM. Over a 24-month follow-up period, knee function improved in the APM group by 26.2 points (from 44.8 to 71.5) and in the PT group by 20.4 points (from 46.5 to 67.7). The overall between-group difference was 3.6 points (97.5% CI, -∞ to 6.5; P value for noninferiority = .001). Adverse events occurred in 18 participants in the APM group and 12 in the PT group. Repeat surgery (3 in the APM group and 1 in the PT group) and additional outpatient visits for knee pain (6 in the APM group and 2 in the PT group) were the most frequent adverse events.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with nonobstructive meniscal tears, PT was noninferior to APM for improving patient-reported knee function over a 24-month follow-up period. Based on these results, PT may be considered an alternative to surgery for patients with nonobstructive meniscal tears.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01850719.
| S-EPMC6583004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This retrospective study was conducted to analyse the reliability of clinical diagnosis in meniscal tear injuries. All patients attending our clinic with knee pain from January 2003 to December 2004 underwent systematic and thorough clinical assessment. One hundred and fifty patients were clinically diagnosed to have meniscal tears. All these patients underwent therapeutic arthroscopic knee surgery. The clinical diagnosis was confirmed during this procedure. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity were calculated based on these arthroscopic findings. The accuracy of clinical diagnosis in our study was 88% for medial meniscal tears and 92% for lateral meniscal tears. The results of this study demonstrate that clinical diagnosis of meniscal tears is as reliable as the results published by other authors for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. We recommend the use of MRI for more doubtful, difficult and complex knee injuries.
| S-EPMC2267536 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine benefits and harms of arthroscopic knee surgery involving partial meniscectomy, debridement, or both for middle aged or older patients with knee pain and degenerative knee disease.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Main outcome measuresPain and physical function.Data sourcesSystematic searches for benefits and harms were carried out in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to August 2014. Only studies published in 2000 or later were included for harms.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials assessing benefit of arthroscopic surgery involving partial meniscectomy, debridement, or both for patients with or without radiographic signs of osteoarthritis were included. For harms, cohort studies, register based studies, and case series were also allowed.ResultsThe search identified nine trials assessing the benefits of knee arthroscopic surgery in middle aged and older patients with knee pain and degenerative knee disease. The main analysis, combining the primary endpoints of the individual trials from three to 24 months postoperatively, showed a small difference in favour of interventions including arthroscopic surgery compared with control treatments for pain (effect size 0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.26). This difference corresponds to a benefit of 2.4 (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 4.3) mm on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale. When analysed over time of follow-up, interventions including arthroscopy showed a small benefit of 3-5 mm for pain at three and six months but not later up to 24 months. No significant benefit on physical function was found (effect size 0.09, -0.05 to 0.24). Nine studies reporting on harms were identified. Harms included symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (4.13 (95% confidence interval 1.78 to 9.60) events per 1000 procedures), pulmonary embolism, infection, and death.ConclusionsThe small inconsequential benefit seen from interventions that include arthroscopy for the degenerative knee is limited in time and absent at one to two years after surgery. Knee arthroscopy is associated with harms. Taken together, these findings do not support the practise of arthroscopic surgery for middle aged or older patients with knee pain with or without signs of osteoarthritis.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42014009145.
| S-EPMC4602246 | biostudies-literature