Chahla Jorge, Dean Chase S, Matheny Lauren M, Mitchell Justin J, Cinque Mark E, LaPrade Robert F
Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.
The Steadman Clinic, Vail, Colorado, USA.
Am J Sports Med. 2017 Jul;45(9):2098-2104. doi: 10.1177/0363546517698944. Epub 2017 Mar 27.
Limited evidence exists for meniscal repair outcomes in a multiligament reconstruction setting. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes and failure rates of meniscal repair in patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction compared with patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction but lacked meniscal tears. The authors hypothesized that the outcomes of meniscal repair associated with concomitant multiligament reconstruction would significantly improve from preoperatively to postoperatively at a minimum of 2 years after the index surgery. Secondarily, they hypothesized that this cohort would demonstrate similar outcomes and failure rates compared with the cohort that did not have meniscal lesions at the time of multiligament reconstruction.
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Inclusion criteria for the study included radiographically confirmed skeletally mature patients of at least 16 years of age who underwent multiligamentous reconstruction of the knee without previous ipsilateral osteotomy, intra-articular infections, or intra-articular fractures. Patients were included in the experimental group if they underwent inside-out meniscal suture repair with concurrent multiligament reconstruction. Those included in the control group (multiligament reconstruction without a meniscal tear) underwent multiligament reconstruction but did not undergo any type of meniscal surgery. Lysholm, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Short Form-12 physical component summary and mental component summary, Tegner activity scale, and patient satisfaction scores were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively. The failure of meniscal repair was defined as a retear of the meniscus that was confirmed arthroscopically.
There were 43 patients (16 female, 27 male) in the meniscal repair group and 62 patients (25 female, 37 male) in the control group. Follow-up was obtained in 93% of patients with a mean of 3.0 years (range, 2.0-4.7 years). There was a significant improvement between all preoperative and postoperative outcome scores ( P < .05) for both groups. The meniscal repair group had significantly lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores ( P = .009 and P = .02, respectively). There were no significant differences between any other outcome scores preoperatively. The failure rate of the meniscal repair group was 2.7%, consisting of 1 symptomatic meniscal retear. There was no significant difference in any postoperative outcome score at a minimum 2-year follow-up between the 2 groups.
Good to excellent patient-reported outcomes were reported for both groups with no significant differences in outcomes between the cohorts. Additionally, the failure rate for inside-out meniscal repair with concomitant multiligament reconstruction was low, regardless of meniscus laterality and tear characteristics. The use of multiple vertical mattress sutures and the biological augmentation resulting from intra-articular cruciate ligament reconstruction tunnel reaming may be partially responsible for the stability of the meniscal repair construct and thereby contribute to the overall improved outcomes and the low failure rate of meniscal repair, despite lower preoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores in the meniscal repair group.
关于在多韧带重建情况下半月板修复结果的证据有限。目的/假设:本研究的目的是评估接受多韧带重建的患者与接受多韧带重建但无半月板撕裂的患者相比,半月板修复的结果和失败率。作者假设,与同期多韧带重建相关的半月板修复结果在初次手术后至少2年从术前到术后将有显著改善。其次,他们假设与多韧带重建时没有半月板损伤的队列相比,该队列将显示出相似的结果和失败率。
队列研究;证据等级,3级。
该研究的纳入标准包括经影像学证实的至少16岁的骨骼成熟患者,这些患者接受了膝关节多韧带重建,且既往无同侧截骨术、关节内感染或关节内骨折。如果患者接受了内外侧半月板缝合修复并同时进行多韧带重建,则纳入实验组。对照组(多韧带重建但无半月板撕裂)的患者接受了多韧带重建,但未接受任何类型的半月板手术。术前和术后记录Lysholm评分、西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数、简明健康状况调查量表的身体成分总结和心理成分总结、Tegner活动量表以及患者满意度评分。半月板修复失败定义为经关节镜证实的半月板再次撕裂。
半月板修复组有43例患者(16例女性,27例男性),对照组有62例患者(25例女性,37例男性)。93%的患者获得了随访,平均随访时间为3.0年(范围为2.0 - 4.7年)。两组术前和术后所有结果评分之间均有显著改善(P < 0.05)。半月板修复组术前Lysholm评分和Tegner评分显著更低(分别为P = 0.009和P = 0.02)。术前其他任何结果评分之间均无显著差异。半月板修复组的失败率为2.7%,包括1例有症状的半月板再次撕裂。两组在至少2年的随访中,任何术后结果评分均无显著差异。
两组患者报告的结果均为良好至优秀,队列之间的结果无显著差异。此外,无论半月板的侧别和撕裂特征如何,内外侧半月板修复并同时进行多韧带重建的失败率较低。使用多条垂直褥式缝合以及关节内交叉韧带重建隧道扩孔所产生的生物增强作用可能部分促成了半月板修复结构的稳定性,从而有助于整体改善结果以及半月板修复的低失败率,尽管半月板修复组术前Lysholm评分和Tegner评分较低。