Search

Purpose: To compare the long-term clinical and radiological results of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) for discoid lateral meniscus (DLM) patients with MAT for non-discoid lateral meniscus patients and meniscectomy (ME) for DLM patients and, thus, to determine whether DLM patients are suitable candidates for MAT. Methods: Eight MAT cases in DLM patients were identified (discoid MAT group), six MAT cases in non-discoid lateral meniscus patients (non-discoid MAT group) and ten total meniscectomy cases in DLM patients (discoid ME group) were matched as controls. Subjective evaluations, postoperative radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were conducted at 5 years and 10–14 years, respectively. Joint degeneration was evaluated by the Kellgren–Lawrance (KL) grade and joint space width (JSW). MRI with T2 mapping sequences was used to quantitatively evaluate degeneration of the joint cartilage and shrinkage of the allografts. Student's t test was used to compare quantitative variables and the Mann‒Whitney U test was used to compare categorical variables. Results: There was no difference in Lysholm, IKDC, Tegner or VAS scores amongst the discoid MAT, non-discoid MAT and discoid ME groups at the final follow-up. No revision surgery was performed in any MAT patient. The JSW narrowing in the discoid MAT group was better than that in the discoid ME group (0.8 ± 0.4 mm vs. 2.1 ± 1.3 mm, p = 0.012) and worse than that in the non-discoid MAT group (0.1 ± 0.1 mm, p = 0.003). The KL progression of the discoid MAT group was less than that of the discoid ME group (1.3 ± 0.7 vs. 2.3 ± 0.9, p = 0.034). The discoid ME group had worse cartilage lesion progression than the discoid MAT and non-discoid MAT groups. The allograft width of the DLM patients shrank more than that of the non-discoid patients at the meniscus midbody (3.6 ± 0.9 mm vs. 6.2 ± 1.9 mm, p = 0.015). Conclusion: Compared to meniscectomy, MAT achieved similar long-term symptom relief and superior chondroprotection in discoid meniscus patients. Despite more graft shrinkage, the outcomes of MAT in discoid meniscus patients were comparable to those in non-discoid meniscus patients. Therefore, DLM patients may be suitable candidates for MAT procedures. Level of evidence: Level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes between the immediate and delayed meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT). Methods: Nine menisci were transplanted immediately after total meniscectomy (immediate group, IM), and 10 menisci were delayed transplanted in patients with the median of 35 months (range 9–92 months) after total meniscectomy (delayed group, DE). Patient's subjective clinical outcomes including VAS, IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores as well as muscle strength measures were compared. Joint degeneration was evaluated by both radiographs to assess joint space width narrowing, Kellegren–Lawrence (KL) grade and MRI with T2 mapping sequences to quantitatively analyze both cartilage and meniscal allograft degeneration. Results: The median follow-up time was 10.8 years (range 10–14 years). The IKDC (IM vs DE, 89.8 vs 80.9, n.s.) and Lysholm scores (IM vs DE, 87.7 vs 78.0, n.s.) were close in two groups, while the IM group showed slightly lower VAS (IM vs DE, 0.2 vs 1.5, p = 0.031), higher Tegner score (IM vs DE, 7 vs 3.5 p = 0.021) and better quadriceps muscle strength. The IM group had less joint space narrowing (IM vs DE, 0.35 mm vs 0.71 mm, n.s.), less KL grade progression (IM vs DE, 0.6 vs 1.7, p = 0.041) on radiographs and less chondral lesions development on MRIs (Cartilage Degeneration Index, IM vs DE, 252 vs 2038, p = 0.025). All meniscal grafts exhibited degeneration by showing grade 3 signal on MRI, and 4 (4/9) in the IM group and 8 (8/10) cases in the DE group. The T2 value of cartilage and meniscal allograft in the IM group was close to that of the healthy control and was significantly lower than that of the DE group. Conclusion: Compared to the conventional delayed MAT, the immediate MAT achieved better cartilage and meniscus protection in the long-term, while its superiority in patient-reported outcomes was limited. Level of evidence: IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The long-term chondroprotective effect of meniscal allograft transplant (MAT) and its superiority over meniscectomy have rarely been reported. Hypothesis: MAT would reduce osteoarthritis (OA) progression when compared with the meniscus-deficient knee. Graft extrusion distance would strongly affect the chondroprotective effect of the MAT. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 17 knees receiving MAT were followed up as the MAT group. The MAT group was further divided into the nonextrusion subgroup (n = 9) and the extrusion subgroup (n = 8) according to 3-mm extrusion on the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) coronal section. A further 26 consecutive patients receiving meniscectomy in the same period were followed up as the ME group. The healthy control group consisted of healthy contralateral legs chosen from the MAT and ME groups (n = 27). Joint space width (JSW) narrowing was measured on radiographs. Three-dimensional MRI with a T2 mapping sequence was used to quantitatively analyze cartilage degeneration and meniscal allograft extrusion in 5 directions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, and 180°). The cartilage degeneration index (CDI) was calculated according to the size and degree of the chondral lesions on MRI scans. The correlation between the CDI increase and the extrusion distance was analyzed. Results: The mean follow-up time was 11.3 years (range, 10-14 years). The MAT group had moderate superiority in chondral protection with less JSW narrowing (0.58 ± 0.66 mm) and CDI increase (1132 ± 1589) compared with the ME group (JSW narrowing: 1.26 ± 1.13 mm, P =.025; CDI increase: 2182 ± 1958, P =.079). The JSW narrowing (0.71 ± 0.80 mm; P =.186) and CDI increase (2004 ± 1965; P =.830) of the extrusion subgroup were close to those of the ME group, demonstrating that a 3-mm extrusion led to complete loss of the meniscal chondroprotective effect. The nonextrusion group had significantly less JSW narrowing (0.48 ± 0.48 mm; P =.042) and CDI increase (358 ± 249; P =.011) than the ME group. The JSW narrowing of the healthy control group was 0.22 ± 0.27 mm. The cartilage T2 values of the extrusion subgroup were similar to those of the ME group, with more OA features, whereas the T2 values of the nonextrusion subgroup were closer to those of the healthy control group. The extrusion distance in the 90° direction (P =.002) and the follow-up time (P =.019) significantly affected the CDI increase in the multivariate regression model. The average extrusion distance in the 45°, 90°, and 135° directions better predicted chondroprotection compared with the other individual directions. Conclusion: MAT had moderate advantages in chondroprotection compared with meniscectomy in the long term. Graft extrusion distance strongly affected the chondroprotective effect of MAT. The chondroprotective effect of the nonextruded meniscal allograft was close to that of the native meniscus, whereas the allografts with an extrusion >3 mm completely lost their function after meniscectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]