Successful treatment of degenerative medial meniscal tears in well-aligned knees with fibrin clot implantation

Biologic Augmentation of Isolated Meniscal Repair

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The limited blood supply and intrinsic healing capacity of the meniscus contributes to suboptimal tissue regeneration following injury and surgical repair. Biologic augmentation techniques have been utilized in combination with isolated meniscal repair to improve tissue regeneration. Several innovative strategies such as Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP), fibrin clots, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), bone marrow stimulation, meniscal scaffolds, and meniscal wrapping, are being explored to enhance repair outcomes. This article provides a comprehensive review of recent findings and conclusions regarding biologic augmentation techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies on PRP reveal mixed outcomes, with some suggesting benefits in reducing failure rates of isolated meniscal repair, while others question its efficacy. Fibrin clots and PRF (Platelet-rich fibrin), although promising, show inconsistent results and lack sufficient evidence for definitive conclusions. MSCs demonstrate potential in preclinical studies, but clinical trials have been limited and inconclusive. Bone marrow stimulation appears effective in certain contexts, but its broader applicability remains uncertain. Meniscal scaffolds, including CMI (Collagen Meniscal Implants) and Actifit (polyurethane scaffolds), show encouraging short- and mid-term outcomes but have not consistently surpassed traditional methods in the long term. Meniscal wrapping is infrequently studied but demonstrates positive short-term results with certain applications. The review reveals a diverse range of outcomes for biologic augmentation in meniscal repair. While certain techniques show promise, particularly in specific scenarios, the overall efficacy of these methods has yet to reach a consensus. The review underscores the necessity for standardized, high-quality research to establish the definitive effectiveness of these biologic augmentation methods.

Meniscal Repair Outcome in 3829 Patients With a Minimum Follow-up From 2 Years Up to 5 Years: A Meta-analysis on the Overall Failure Rate and Factors Influencing Failure

BACKGROUND

The importance of meniscal repair is widely accepted because of the association of loss of meniscal tissue with the development of early-onset knee arthritis. Many factors influencing the results of meniscal repair have been reported, but results remain controversial.

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis determines the pooled meniscal repair failure rate of studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years up to 5 years, with a mean follow-up of 43 months. Moreover, selected failure-influencing factors are analyzed.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 2000 and November 2021 reporting on meniscal repair outcome with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The overall pooled failure rate and pooled failure rates for possible predictors were calculated. Random-effect models were used to pool failure rates, and effect estimates in the form of odds ratios with 95% CIs were established.

RESULTS

The initial literature search identified 6519 studies. A total of 51 studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 3931 menisci were included with an overall failure rate of 14.8%. Subgroup analysis revealed a significantly lower failure rate for meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction compared with knees without any reported injury to the ACL (8.5% vs 14%; P = .043). The pooled failure rate for lateral meniscal repair was significantly lower than that for medial meniscal repair (6.1% vs 10.8%; P = .031). Pooled failure rates of all-inside and inside-out repair were not significantly different (11.9% vs 10.6%; P > .05).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis on close to 4000 patients demonstrates an overall meniscal repair failure rate of 14.8% at a minimum follow-up from 2 years up to 5 years. Meniscal repair remains a procedure with a high failure rate, especially within the first 2 postoperative years. This review and meta-analysis also identified clinically relevant factors associated with favorable outcomes such as concomitant ACL reconstruction or repair of the lateral meniscus. All-inside meniscal repair with the latest-generation devices yields failure rates of <10%. The failure mechanism and the time of failure is poorly documented; further studies are needed for a better understanding of the retear mechanism.

Outcomes of Meniscal Repair in Patients Aged 40 and Above: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Meniscal injuries are increasingly common in older age groups. Age is often cited as a contraindication to undergoing meniscal repair due to concerns regarding failure rates. There has recently, however, been an increasing shift towards repair in older populations. The purpose of this study was to review outcomes of meniscal repair in patients over the age of 40.

METHODS

A systematic search of the following databases was conducted of PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify studies reporting failure rates of patients over 40 with meniscal injuries undergoing repair. The definition of meniscus failure was noted for each study evaluated in this systematic review. Further data surrounding clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded and evaluated, when available.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this review, encompassing a total of 316 meniscal repairs in patients over the age of 40 years. The overall failure rate was found to be 15.5% (49/316) (range 0-33.3%). There was no difference in the failure rate in those over 40 vs. under 40, and the two groups had equivalent functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Age should not be considered a contra-indication for meniscal repair. Appropriately selected older patients can have acceptably low failure rates with meniscal repair and similar functional outcomes to those under the age of forty. Meniscal repairs in those over 40 achieved better functional outcomes than patients of the same age group who underwent meniscectomy.

Horizontal Cleavage Meniscus Tears: Biomechanics, Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

» Accounting for up to 24% of all meniscus tears, horizontal cleavage tears (HCTs) are a common pathology orthopaedic practitioners should be comfortable managing.» Historically, HCTs were treated with partial meniscectomy; however, recent studies have demonstrated that these procedures have an adverse biomechanical effect, while HCT repairs restore the knee's natural biomechanics.» Indications for the surgical repair of HCTs remain disputed, but surgery is generally considered for young, active patients and older patients without significant concomitant osteoarthritis.» Early clinical findings surrounding HCT repair are promising. They suggest that this treatment adequately restores meniscus mechanics, leads to good knee functional outcomes, and results in a high likelihood of return to preinjury activity levels.

Fibrin clot and Leukocyte-rich platelet-rich fibrin show similar release kinetics and amount of growth factors: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

In knee arthroscopic surgery, fibrin clot (FC) and leukocyte-rich platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) may be used in augmentation for meniscal repair. Studies have investigated growth factors released from FC and L-PRF; however, it is difficult to compare FC and L-PRF between different studies. Direct comparison of growth factors that may support meniscal healing released from FC and L-PRF may be beneficial in deciding whether to use FC or L-PRF. If no significant difference is seen, the surgeon may decide to use FC which is easier to prepare compared to L-PRF. The purpose of this pilot study is to investigate the release amount and pattern of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), platelet-derived growth factor AB (PDGF-AB), transforming growth factor β1 (TGF-β1), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and stromal cell-derived factor 1 (SDF-1) from FC and L-PRF.

METHOD

Twenty milliliters (ml) of whole blood was collected from each of the four volunteers. Ten milliliters of whole blood was allocated for preparation of FC and 10 ml for L-PRF. FC and L-PRF were separately placed in 5 ml of culture media. Five milliliters of the culture media was sampled and refilled at 15 min, 1 day, 3 days, 1 week and 2 weeks. The collected culture was used to quantify bFGF, PDGF-AB, TGF-β1, VEGF, and SDF-1 release by Enzyme-linked immune-sorbent assay (ELISA). Mann-Whitney U test was performed to assess significance of differences in amount of each growth factor released between FC and L-PRF. Significance was accepted at P value less than 0.05.

RESULTS

At two weeks, the cumulative release of TGF-β1 was the highest among all the growth factors in both FC and L-PRF (FC:19,738.21 pg/ml, L-PRF: 16,229.79 pg/ml). PDGF-AB (FC: 2328 pg/ml, L-PRF 1513.57 pg/ml) had the second largest amount, followed by VEGF (FC: 702.06 pg/ml, L-PRF 595.99 pg/ml) and bFGF (FC: 23.48 pg/ml, L-PRF 18.2 pg/ml), which order was also common in both FC and L-PRF. No significant difference in final release amount and pattern was seen between FC and L-PRF.

CONCLUSION

The current pilot study showed that cumulative release amount and release pattern of PDGF-AB, VEGF, TGF-β1, and bFGF did not significantly differ between FC and L-PRF during the two weeks of observation.

Bone Marrow-Derived Fibrin Clots Stimulate Healing of a Meniscal Defect in a Rabbit Model

PURPOSE

To determine the in vivo effectiveness of bone marrow aspirate-derived (BMA) fibrin clots for avascular meniscal defect healing in a rabbit model.

METHODS

In 42 Japanese white rabbits, a 2.0-mm cylindrical defect was introduced into the avascular zone of the anterior part of the medial meniscus in the bilateral knees. The rabbits were grouped according to implantation of a BMA fibrin clot (BMA group) or a peripheral blood (PB)-derived clot (PB group) into the defect and nonimplantation (control group). Macroscopic and histological assessments were performed using a scoring system at 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. At 12 weeks after surgery, compressive stress was analyzed biomechanically.

RESULTS

The meniscal score in the BMA group (12.1) was greater than that in the PB group (5.5; P = .031) and control group (4.4; P = .013) at 4 weeks. The meniscal score in the BMA group (13.1) was greater than that in the control group (6.4; BMA = 13.1; P = .0046) at 12 weeks. In the biomechanical analysis, the BMA group demonstrated significantly higher compressive strength than the PB group (6.6 MPa) (BMA = 15.4 MPa; P = .0201) and control group (3.6 MPa; BMA = 15.4 MPa; P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of BMA fibrin clots into the meniscal defect of the avascular zone in a rabbit model improved the meniscal score at 4 weeks and strengthened the reparative meniscal tissue at 12 weeks compared with the implantation of PB fibrin clots.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Healing in the avascular zone of the meniscus can be problematic. Approaches to improving this healing response have had variable results. This study provides additional information that may help improve the outcomes in patients with these injuries.

Biological augmentation of meniscal repair: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Orthopedic literature remains divided on the utility of biologic augmentation to optimize outcomes after isolated meniscal repair. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the clinical outcomes and re-operation rates of biologically augmented meniscal repairs.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were queried in October 2020 for published literature on isolated meniscal repair with biological augmentation. Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias by two appraisal tools. Patient demographics, meniscal tear characteristics, surgical procedure, augmentation type, post-operative rehabilitation, patient reported outcome measures, and length of follow-up were recorded, reviewed, and analyzed by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Of 3794 articles, 18 met inclusion criteria and yielded 537 patients who underwent biologic augmentation of meniscal repair. The biologically augmented repair rates were 5.8-27.0% with PRP augmentation, 0.0-28.5% with fibrin clot augmentation, 0.0-12.9% with marrow stimulation, and 0.0% with stem cell augmentation. One of seven studies showed lower revision rates with augmented meniscal repair compared to standard repair techniques, whereas five of seven found no benefit. Three of ten studies found significant functional improvement of biologically augmented repair versus standard repair techniques and six of ten studies found no difference. There was significant heterogeneity in methods for biologic preparation, delivery, and post-operative rehabilitation protocols.

CONCLUSION

Patients reported significant improvements in functional outcomes scores after repair with biological augmentation, though the benefit over standard repair controls is questionable. Revision rates after biologically augmented meniscal repair also appear similar to standard repair techniques. Clinicians should bear this in mind when considering biologic augmentation in the setting of meniscal repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Evidence-based rationale for treatment of meniscal lesions in athletes

Meniscal injuries in elite athletes are a common cause of missed game time and even have the potential to be career shortening. In this patient group, care must be paid not only to the pathology, but also to a player's contract status, time in the season, specific demands of his/her sport and position on the field, and future consequences. Successful treatment requires the clinician to understand the player's goals and needs, communicate effectively between all stakeholders, and a have knowledge of the challenges posed by the different types of meniscal tear seen in this population. Paramount is the distinction between injuries to the medial and lateral meniscus. Deficiency of the lateral meniscus, as a result of a tear or a meniscectomy, leads to frequent early problems and inexorably to chondral degeneration thereby affecting an athlete's ability to perform. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to repair the majority of lateral meniscal tears. Medial meniscal tears pose a more challenging treatment dilemma, as the success of partial meniscectomy in achieving reproducible, early return to play must be balanced against the long-term degenerative consequences. Many meniscal tears are correctly treated non-operatively.Level of evidence V.

Degenerative Meniscus in Knee Osteoarthritis: From Pathology to Treatment

Knee osteoarthritis is a common degenerative joint disease characterized by chronic knee pain and disability in daily living. The lesion can involve the cartilage as well as the synovium, bone, ligaments, and meniscus, indicating a complicated pathology for knee osteoarthritis. The association with the meniscus has recently attracted much attention. Meniscal tears can initiate and progress knee osteoarthritis, with deleterious effects on the important roles of the meniscus in load distribution, shock absorption, and stability of the knee joint. Degenerative meniscus lesions are commonly observed in elderly people, but they have less impact on the prognosis of osteoarthritis. However, they are often accompanied by meniscal extrusion, which substantially decreases the hoop function of the meniscus and increases the risk of knee osteoarthritis. When surgical treatment is necessary, meniscal tears should be repaired to the greatest extent possible to preserve meniscus function. Long-term studies show better clinical outcomes and less degenerative osteoarthritis changes following meniscal repair than following partial meniscectomy. For meniscal extrusion repair, centralization techniques have been proposed that involve suturing the meniscus-capsule complex to the edge of the tibial plateau. Advancements in orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich plasma or stem cell therapy, have the potential to prevent the initiation or progression of osteoarthritis.

Current Concepts on Tissue Adhesive Use for Meniscal Repair-We Are Not There Yet: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Tissue adhesives (TAs) represent a promising alternative or augmentation method to conventional tissue repair techniques. In sports medicine, TA use has been suggested and implemented in the treatment of meniscal tears. The aim of this review was to present and discuss the current evidence and base of knowledge regarding the clinical usage of TAs for meniscal repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies reporting on clinical outcomes of TA usage for meniscal repair in humans in the English language published before January 2020.

RESULTS

Ten studies were eligible for review and included 352 meniscal repairs: 94 (27%) were TA-based repairs and 258 (73%) were combined suture and TA repairs. Concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was performed in 224 repairs (64%). All included studies utilized fibrin-based TA. Of the 10 studies, 9 were evidence level 4 (case series), and 8 reported on a cohort of ≤40 meniscal repairs. Rates of meniscal healing were evaluated in 9 of 10 studies, with repair failure seen in 39 repairs (11%).

CONCLUSION

The use of TAs, specifically fibrin-based TAs, for meniscal repair shows good results as either an augmentation or primary repair of various configurations of meniscal tears. However, this review reveals an absence of comparative high-quality evidence supporting the routine use of TAs for meniscal repair and emphasizes the lack of an ideal TA designed for that purpose. Further high-quality research, basic science and clinical, will facilitate the development of new materials and enable testing their suitability for use in meniscal repair.

Biochemical Characteristics and Clinical Result of Bone Marrow-Derived Fibrin Clot for Repair of Isolated Meniscal Injury in the Avascular Zone

PURPOSE

To characterize bone marrow aspirate-derived fibrin clot (BMA clot) and evaluate the clinical result of meniscal repair with a BMA clot for isolated meniscal injury in the avascular zone.

METHODS

Blood counts of total leukocytes, platelets, and concentrations of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), transforming growth factor β (TGF-β), and stromal cell-derived factor 1 (SDF-1) were analyzed with BMA, peripheral blood (PB), BMA clot, and PB clot from 5 patients treated for meniscal repair. In addition, a retrospective analysis of 30 patients with isolated avascular meniscal injuries who underwent repair with a BMA clot was performed to assess rate failure. Avascular meniscal injury was identified as horizontal tear, radial tear, and flap tear. Clinical failure was defined as the presence of 1 or more of Barrett's criteria. Anatomic failure was defined as the existence of equivalent signal intensity to intra-articular fluid along the repair area on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patients' demographic and clinical data were compared between the overall failure group and the success group.

RESULTS

The bFGF, TGF-β, and SDF-1 levels of BMA clots were more highly concentrated compared with PB clots. The Lysholm scores and meniscal status evaluated by MRI were significantly improved from preoperatively to postoperatively (both P < .001). The Kellgren-Lawrence grading of knee radiographs did not significantly differ pre- and postoperatively (P = .140). Rates of clinical failure, anatomic failure, and retear were 10%, 6.7%, and 3.3%, respectively. The demographic characteristics and surgical and postoperative status did not significantly differ between the overall failure group and the success group.

CONCLUSIONS

BMA clots had increased levels of cytokines compared to PB clots. The retrospective analysis revealed that the rates of clinical failure and anatomic failure after meniscal repair with a BMA clot for isolated avascular meniscal injury were 10% and 6.7%, respectively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

A review of strategies for development of tissue engineered meniscal implants

The meniscus is a key stabilizing tissue of the knee that facilitates proper tracking and movement of the knee joint and absorbs stresses related to physical activity. This review article describes the biology, structure, and functions of the human knee meniscus, common tears and repair approaches, and current research and development approaches using modern methods to fabricate a scaffold or tissue engineered meniscal replacement. Meniscal tears are quite common, often resulting from sports or physical training, though injury can result without specific contact during normal physical activity such as bending or squatting. Meniscal injuries often require surgical intervention to repair, restore basic functionality and relieve pain, and severe damage may warrant reconstruction using allograft transplants or commercial implant devices. Ongoing research is attempting to develop alternative scaffold and tissue engineered devices using modern fabrication techniques including three-dimensional (3D) printing which can fabricate a patient-specific meniscus replacement. An ideal meniscal substitute should have mechanical properties that are close to that of natural human meniscus, and also be easily adapted for surgical procedures and fixation. A better understanding of the organization and structure of the meniscus as well as its potential points of failure will lead to improved design approaches to generate a suitable and functional replacement.

Biologic Augmentation Reduces the Failure Rate of Meniscal Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Clinical results after isolated meniscal repair are not always satisfactory, with an overall failure rate of around 25%. To improve the success rate of meniscal repair, different biologic augmentation techniques have been introduced in clinical practice, but their real efficacy is still controversial.

Purpose/Hypothesis

To evaluate the safety, clinical results, and failure rate of biologic augmentation techniques for meniscal repair. The hypothesis was that biologic augmentation would improve the results of meniscal repair.

Study Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was performed in March 2020 of 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library) regarding meniscal repair combined with biologic augmentation techniques. Articles combining biologic augmentation with other surgical procedures besides meniscal suture were excluded. The quality of the included studies was assessed using a modified Coleman Methodology Score, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) and the RoB 2.0 (Revised Tool for Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials) for nonrandomized and randomized controlled trials, respectively.

Results

A total of 11 studies were included in the qualitative analysis: platelet-rich plasma (PRP) augmentation in 6 comparatives studies, fibrin clot augmentation in 2 case series, and mesenchymal stem cells augmentation in 2 case series and 1 case report. One severe adverse event of septic arthritis was reported for PRP 1 month after surgery. The quality of evidence evaluated with the modified Coleman Methodology Score was low overall. Five studies reporting on 286 patients (111 PRP augmentation, 175 control) were included in the quantitative synthesis. A significantly lower risk of failure was documented in the PRP augmentation group as compared with the control group: 9.9% (4.5%-19.1%) versus 25.7% (12.7%-38.7%) (P < .0005).

Conclusion

The literature on biologic meniscal augmentation is recent and scarce. Only a few comparative trials are available, all focusing on the potential of PRP. The meta-analysis documented that PRP is safe and useful in improving the survival rate, with a 9.9% rate of failure versus 25.7% for the control group. Further high-level studies are needed to confirm these findings and identify the most effective biologic augmentation strategy to improve the outcome of meniscal repair.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation for Isolated Arthroscopic Meniscal Repairs Leads to Significantly Lower Failure Rates: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies

Background:

Studies have reported relatively high failure rates of isolated meniscal repairs. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been suggested as a way to increase growth factors that enhance healing.

Purpose:

To compare (1) meniscal repair failures and (2) patient-reported outcomes after isolated arthroscopic meniscal repair augmented with and without PRP.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A systematic review was performed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Multiple databases were searched for studies that compared outcomes of isolated arthroscopic meniscal repair augmented with PRP versus without PRP in human patients. Failures and patient-reported outcome scores were reported for each study and compared between groups. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I² for each outcome measure before meta-analysis. Study methodological quality was analyzed. Continuous variable data were reported as mean and standard deviation from the mean. Categorical variable data were reported as frequency with percentage. All P values were reported with significance set at P < .05.

Results:

Five articles were analyzed (274 patients [110 with PRP and 164 without PRP]; 65.8% male; mean age, 29.1 ± 4.6 years; mean follow-up, 29.2 ± 22.1 months). The risk of meniscal repair failure ranged from 4.4% to 26.7% for PRP-augmented repairs and 13.3% to 50.0% for repairs without PRP. Meniscal repairs augmented with PRP had significantly lower failure rates than repairs without PRP (odds ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.90; P = .03). One of the 5 studies reported significantly higher outcomes in the PRP-augmented group versus the no-PRP group for the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (P < .05 for all). The remaining 4 studies reported no significant difference between groups with regard to outcomes for the IKDC, Lysholm knee scale, visual analog scale for pain, or Tegner activity level.

Conclusion:

Although the studies were of mostly of low quality, isolated arthroscopic meniscal repairs augmented with PRP led to significantly lower failure rates (10.8% vs 27.0%; odds ratio, 0.32; P = .03) as compared with repairs without PRP. However, most studies reported no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes.

Patient Outcomes After Horizontal Cleavage Tear Repair: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze the clinical outcomes and survivorship of meniscal horizontal cleavage tear (HCT) repairs with hopes of guiding future treatment decisions.

METHODS

Standard systematic review methodology was used. A comprehensive search of PubMed was conducted on June 1, 2019. The inclusion criteria were articles that were published in English, involved human subjects, and reported on at least 1 outcome after repair of HCTs. The exclusion criteria included technique guides and reviews, studies without full text available, and studies with HCT outcomes not separated from other repair groups. Effect heterogeneity was determined using the I² measure. Forest plots were created in addition to a random-effects model to show the results.

RESULTS

The systematic review yielded 19 studies evaluating 289 knees in a total of 273 patients. At most recent follow-up, there was a high probability of return to sport (93.1% [67 of 72]). Overall, 74% of patients (67 of 90) were symptom free at last follow-up, and 80% expressed satisfaction with their overall result (80 of 100). The most frequently reported subjective outcome was the Lysholm score, which improved from a preoperative study range of 48 to 79 (I² = 20.7%, P = .283) to a postoperative study range of 56 to 99 (I² = 49%, P = .081). The next most commonly reported was the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, which improved from a preoperative study range of 16 to 49 (I² = 47.7%, P = .125) to a postoperative study range of 72 to 95 (I² = 0%, P = .660). An overall 11.7% reported risk of reoperation was found, with most cases involving revision meniscectomy. Rates of complications beyond fixation failure were overall very low, with infrequent reports of septic arthritis and transitory dysesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- to intermediate-term results of repair of HCTs are comparable to prior studies. Survivorship is comparable to repairs of other types of meniscal tears with high rates of return to sport and low complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.