MacLean Ian S, Miller Mark D
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Health System, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Video J Sports Med. 2022 Nov 17;2(6):26350254221122614. doi: 10.1177/26350254221122614. eCollection 2022 Nov-Dec.
All-inside meniscal repair first became popularized in the early 2000s. Since that time, there has been a wide variety of all-inside implants on the market with rapid changes and developments in recent years.
Small, peripheral, longitudinal tears are best suited for all-inside repair, but this technique may even be used for large bucket handle tears especially when hybridized with an inside-out repair.
A percutaneous release of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) with an 18-g spinal needle is frequently performed when working in the medial compartment to improve visualization and decrease risk of iatrogenic chondral injury. Close familiarity with the characteristics of the chosen all-inside device including device angle, modifiability of device angle, modifiability of needle depth, deployment method, and tensioning technique is important for obtaining reproducible results. Typically, obtaining a vertical mattress stitch configuration is optimal as it captures more circumferential collagen fibers in the repair.
Factors to consider when selecting an all-inside meniscal repair device include the ergonomics of the device, implant cost, availability, rigid versus suture-based anchor, core needle diameter, device flexibility, and percent of misfires.
Complications from use of all-inside meniscus repair devices include device failure, soft tissue entrapment, cyst formation, and injury to the popliteal artery. Outcomes, however, with current devices are good and comparable to inside-out meniscus repair with about a 90% return to sports rate at 12 months postoperatively.The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.
全内半月板修复术在21世纪初首次得到推广。从那时起,市场上出现了各种各样的全内植入物,近年来变化和发展迅速。
小的、周边的、纵向撕裂最适合全内修复,但这种技术甚至可用于大型桶柄状撕裂,尤其是与由内向外修复相结合时。
在内侧间室操作时,经常使用18号脊椎穿刺针经皮松解内侧副韧带(MCL),以改善视野并降低医源性软骨损伤风险。熟悉所选全内装置的特性,包括装置角度、装置角度的可调节性、针深度的可调节性、展开方法和张紧技术,对于获得可重复的结果很重要。通常,获得垂直褥式缝合构型是最佳的,因为它在修复中捕获更多的圆周胶原纤维。
选择全内半月板修复装置时要考虑的因素包括装置的人体工程学、植入物成本、可用性、刚性与缝线锚定、芯针直径、装置灵活性和误射率。
使用全内半月板修复装置的并发症包括装置故障、软组织嵌顿、囊肿形成和腘动脉损伤。然而,目前装置的结果良好,与由内向外半月板修复相当,术后12个月约90%的患者可恢复运动。作者证明已获得本出版物中出现的任何患者的同意。如果个体可识别,作者已随本投稿包含患者的豁免声明或其他书面批准形式以供发表。