Investigation performed at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Am J Sports Med. 2019 Mar;47(3):612-619. doi: 10.1177/0363546518819444. Epub 2019 Jan 17.
BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is used to treat meniscal tears, although its efficacy is controversial. PURPOSE: This study used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to determine characteristics that lead to greater benefit from APM and physical therapy (PT) than from PT alone among patients with meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Using data from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial, the authors first assessed whether the effect of treatment on pain scores at 6 months differed according to baseline MRI features (bone marrow lesions, cartilage and meniscal damage). Second, the authors summed MRI features associated with differential pain relief between APM and PT to create a "damage score," which included bone marrow lesion number and cartilage damage size with possible values of 0 (least damage), 1 (moderate), and 2 (greatest). The authors used linear models to determine whether the association between damage score and pain relief at 6 months differed for APM versus PT. RESULTS: The study included 220 participants: 13%, had the least damage; 52%, moderate; and 34%, greatest. Although treatment type did not significantly modify the association of damage score and change in pain ( P interaction = .13), those with the least damage and moderate damage had greater improvement with APM than with PT in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain subscale-by 15 and 7 points, respectively. Those with the greatest damage had a similar improvement with APM and PT. CONCLUSION: Among patients with osteoarthritis and meniscal tear, those with less intra-articular damage on MRI may have greater improvement in pain with APM and PT than with PT alone. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously owing to the limited sample size.
背景:关节镜下半月板部分切除术(APM)用于治疗半月板撕裂,但疗效存在争议。
目的:本研究通过磁共振成像(MRI)确定半月板撕裂合并膝关节骨关节炎患者接受 APM 联合物理治疗(PT)与单纯 PT 相比获益更大的特征。
研究设计:队列研究;证据等级 2。
方法:利用 Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research(MeTeOR)试验的数据,作者首先评估了基线 MRI 特征(骨髓病变、软骨和半月板损伤)是否影响治疗后 6 个月的疼痛评分。其次,作者将与 APM 和 PT 之间的差异缓解相关的 MRI 特征相加,创建一个“损伤评分”,其中包括骨髓病变数量和软骨损伤大小,可能的值为 0(最小损伤)、1(中等损伤)和 2(最大损伤)。作者使用线性模型确定损伤评分与 6 个月时疼痛缓解之间的关系在 APM 与 PT 之间是否存在差异。
结果:该研究纳入了 220 名参与者:13%为最小损伤,52%为中等损伤,34%为最大损伤。尽管治疗类型并未显著改变损伤评分与疼痛变化之间的关联(P 交互=0.13),但最小损伤和中等损伤患者接受 APM 治疗的疼痛改善程度大于接受 PT 治疗,分别为 15 分和 7 分;而最大损伤患者接受 APM 和 PT 治疗的疼痛改善程度相似。
结论:在患有骨关节炎和半月板撕裂的患者中,MRI 显示关节内损伤较小的患者接受 APM 和 PT 治疗的疼痛改善程度可能大于单纯接受 PT 治疗。然而,由于样本量有限,这些结果应谨慎解释。
Br J Sports Med. 2019-2-22
J Korean Med Sci. 2021-11-22
Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2022-9
J Korean Med Sci. 2021-11-22
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014-12
N Engl J Med. 2013-12-26
N Engl J Med. 2013-3-18
Contemp Clin Trials. 2012-9-5
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011-5-23