Introduction. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are one of the most common knee injuries amongst elite athletes and usually require an ACL reconstruction (ACLR) to enable return to sport. Secondary surgery can result in a longer rehabilitation period and often a. significant time away from sport which can have implications to the athlete including contract obligations and sponsorship. Advances in ACLR techniques and meniscal repair techniques as well as an awareness of meniscal root lesions, ramp lesions and lateral extraarticular procedures (LEAPs) during ACL surgery has improved outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rates of secondary surgery following the introduction of a systematic arthroscopic evaluation of the knee, improved meniscal repair techniques and the addition of a concomitant LEAP This systematic approach was introduced after October 2012 (10/2012). Methods. Professional athletes who underwent primary ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified from the (blinded for review). Those who had undergone major concomitant procedures such as multi-ligament reconstruction or osteotomy were excluded. Analysis of the database and review of medical records identified athletes who had underwent secondary surgery procedures. Results. A total of 342 athletes with a mean follow-up of 100.2 +/− 51.9 months (range, 24–215 months) were analysed. 130 athletes underwent surgery before 10/2012 and 212 athletes underwent surgery after 10/2012. Overall, 74 patients (21.6%) underwent secondary surgery. 39 patients (30.0% including 13.1% for graft rupture) before 10/2012 and 35 patients (16.5% including 6.6% for graft rupture) after 10/2012. A multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox model and demonstrated that athletes undergoing ACLR before10/2012 were at almost 2-fold risk of secondary surgery (hazard ratio (HR), 1.768(1.103;2.836), p=0.0256) when compared with those undergoing ACLR after 10/2012. (Figure 1). Conclusion. Professional athletes undergoing ACLR with a systematic arthroscopic evaluation with the use of advanced meniscal repair techniques and the combination with a LEAP result in a significantly lower rate of secondary surgery. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Background. The mechanical disadvantage and detrimental effect to articular cartilage following meniscectomy has been well documented in the literature. Meniscal repair in the avascular (white on white zone) is controversial and would be deemed inappropriate by many. Methods. Prospective data collection on all meniscal repairs between 1999 and 2008. 423 patients underwent meniscal repair at our unit during this time. We identified 88 patients who underwent a meniscal repair of a non peripheral tear (white on white zone) where there was no co-existent ACL injury or instability. There were 74 males and 14 females with a mean age of 26 years (13-54). There were 50 medial meniscal tears and 38 lateral tears, all in the non peripheral area of the meniscus. The criterion for failure was any reoperation on the same meniscus requiring excision or re fixation. Results. The mean follow up was 44 months (5–106). Twenty nine patients required further surgery on their repaired meniscus. There were nine re-repairs and twenty partial menisectomies. Of the nine re-repairs only one has gone on to have a further procedure with meniscectomy. This represents a success rate of 67% (59/88). The mean pre-operative Lysholm score was 61 (4-88) which rose to 75 (12-100) postoperatively, (p=0.002). The mean pre-operative Tegner score was 6 (3-10) and this did not change significantly post operatively, mean 6 (0-10) (p=0.4). Conclusions. Isolated white on white avascular meniscal tears can be successfully repaired in the majority of cases with a good clinical and functional result

Objective. To provide a best estimate of the average treatment effect when microfracture was chosen as the intervention of choice in patients with full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee. Design. We focussed on controlled studies which either referred to microfracture alone or in comparison with any other surgical treatment of articular cartilage of the knee. Papers including patients who had been treated by microfracture and concomitant adjuvant procedures like ACL reconstruction or meniscus repair were accepted too, whereas papers reporting on the microfracture technique combined with the implantation of a scaffold were excluded. To achieve a best estimate of the average, to be expected treatment effect we pooled pooled before–after data of study arms using microfracture. Because cartilage studies employ various scales to measure functional improvements, we standardized treatment effects using Hedges' g. To provide clinically meaningful estimates we converted the pooled summary effect back into the respective scales by multiplying the pooled effect with pooled standard deviations of each included clinical scale. Results. A systematic review of the literature revealed six papers including 200 patients with a mean age of 32 years, a mean defect size of 3 cm. 2. and a follow up period from 2 to 5 years. Four of the studies compared microfracture to autologous chondrocyte implantation and two of them to osteochondral autologous transplantation. All patients were treated by the microfracture technique as described by Steadman and by a similar rehabilitation protocol which only allowed crutch-assisted touchdown weight bearing initially. Referring to the individual studies, a comparison of the pooled estimates of Hedges' g revealed that the two papers which evaluated the youngest patients provided the highest treatment effect. On the contrary, those two papers which focussed on the largest lesions, reported the worst improvement. Finally, the remaining two papers whose patients were characterized by similar age and defect size presented comparable results. The individual standardized effect sizes were combined into an overall best estimate. Its value was 1.678, measured in units of standard deviation, with the 95% confidence interval of [1.016; 2.340] resulting in different values of the average, to be expected treatment effect when it is measured in Lysholm Score (22.1), IKDC Score (26.5) and KOOS (15.2) points. Conclusions. Our results offer a clinically intuitive estimation of the average treatment effects on common clinical scales. Compared to the preoperative situation, a significant clinical improvement can be expected for each patient. Nevertheless, the magnitudes of these treatment effects are an approximation and must be interpreted cautiously. Furthermore, we did not succeed to confirm that young age and small lesion size have a beneficial effect on the clinical outcome

INTRODUCTION. The purpose of this study is to report results from a prospective multicenter study of a bioresorbable type I collagen scaffold used to replace tissue loss following irreparable lateral meniscus injuries. METHODS. 49 non-consecutive patients (33M/16F; mean age 30.5 yrs, range 14.7–54.7 yrs) with irreparable lateral meniscus tears or loss requiring surgical treatment were prospectively enrolled at one of 7 EU centers. 11 patients (22%) had acute injuries of the lateral meniscus, while 38 (78%) had prior surgeries to the involved meniscus. Implantation of the LCMI (now Lateral Menaflex) was performed arthroscopically using an all-inside suturing technique (FASTFIX) combined with inside-out sutures in the more anterior meniscus aspect. Forty-three patients were evaluated with a 2 to 4-year follow-up (FU); mean FU duration was 45 months (range, 33–53 m). Patients were evaluated clinically and by self-assessment using Tegner activity and Lysholm function scores, as well as the Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for pain, and a satisfaction questionnaire. Evaluations were performed pre-operatively, 6 months, 1 year, 2 and 4 years after surgery. X-ray and/or MR-images were taken pre-operatively, and at 1 year and 2 years after surgery. RESULTS. At 3 months after surgery, all patients were able to return to activities of daily living without limitation. Post-op. mean values of all evaluated patients showed statistically significant improvement compared to the preoperative scores. Mean Tegner scores increased from 3.0 to 5.2 at 4 years (0.8 points less than the pre-injury “recall” value); mean Lysholm improved from 63 to 91; mean pain (VAS) decreased from 36 to 8. At the 4-year time point, 86% of the patients stated that they were satisfied with their results (compared to 78% at the one year FU time point). Function and pain scores improved continuously with the highest score at the latest FU evaluation. All data were statistically significant (p<0.001, except for Tegner with p=0.03). MRI examination revealed no changes to the articular cartilage and joint space; however, the newly formed tissue did not present a signal consistent with fully mature native meniscus tissue. Reoperations were necessary in 5 patients (10%) during the FU time period: 3 of the reoperations were for persistent swelling and pain, which were classified as related to the device (6%) and were treated by synovectomy and debridement. Patients recovered without sequelae. The re-op. rate in this series is comparable to re-op. rates reported after lateral meniscal repair. DISCUSSION. Based on available results with a minimum 2 year FU, 90% of the patients benefited from the Lateral Menaflex as evidenced by improved clinical outcomes associated with gains in activity and function. Longer-term FU continues to determine the extent and duration of the benefits observed