Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
PURPOSE: To describe the patient-reported clinical outcomes following medial meniscus root repair with meniscus centralization and to identify common complications and detail provisional results. METHODS: Patients undergoing medial meniscus root repair with meniscus centralization from 2020 to 2022 were identified using an institutional database. Patients were followed prospectively using postoperative Tegner Activity Scale, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement, International Knee Documentation Committee score, and a Likert score for improvement, surgery satisfaction, and subsequent surgeries at minimum 1-year follow-up with mean 2-year follow-up. Demographics, injury characteristics, and surgical details were also collected. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (age: 50 ± 11 years; sex: 76% female; body mass index: 33 ± 8) were included in this study. Postoperative Tegner score was maintained at preoperative levels (P = .233), and VAS at rest, VAS with use, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement, and International Knee Documentation Committee improved significantly postoperatively (P = .003; P < .001, P < .001, P = .023, respectively). Eighty-eight percent of patients reported subjective improvement in their knee at final follow-up. Postoperative radiographs did not show any significant osteoarthritis progression, and no patients had undergone a revision meniscus surgery or total knee arthroplasty at the time of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: At minimum 1-year follow-up and mean 2-year follow-up, patients undergoing medial meniscus root repair with meniscus centralization demonstrated significant postoperative improvements in pain, function, and quality of life and reported high rates of surgery satisfaction. There was no evidence of significant arthritic progression on postoperative imaging, and no patients underwent revision meniscus surgery or total knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.
Krych et al. (Wed,) studied this question.