Conundrum of mechanical knee symptoms: signifying feature of a meniscal tear?

Resolution of Pain at Night and Improved Functional Outcomes After Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy

Background

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is performed for symptomatic meniscal tears that fail conservative treatment. Patients often report pain at night, although little research has been done to evaluate corresponding outcomes.

Purpose

To (1) evaluate patients with and without preoperative nighttime pain who underwent APM and (2) assess postoperative resolution of symptoms and associated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing primary APM with or without chondroplasty at a tertiary academic center were prospectively enrolled in a database. Patient characteristics and PROMs were obtained pre- and postoperatively up to 2 years-including the visual analog pain scale, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Marx Scale, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical and mental components. Patients were included if they had a minimum 3-month PROMs follow-up. Pain at night was defined as reporting greater than mild pain on KOOS P7. Intraoperatively, cartilage was assessed using the Outerbridge Classification.

Results

A total of 587 patients were included, with 299 (50.9%) reporting preoperative pain at night, which corresponded with worse baseline PROMs. These patients were older and more likely to be women and smokers. No significant difference was observed in Outerbridge grade between patients with and without preoperative pain at night. Postoperatively, nighttime pain resolved by 2 years in 274 (91.6%) patients, 219 of whom (79.9%) reported improvement by 3 months. Patients whose pain at night persisted had a longer duration of symptoms preoperatively, higher body mass index, and a lack of baseline mechanical symptoms. PROMs significantly improved for patients with and without preoperative pain at night, although patients with baseline pain had worse scores compared with those without preoperative nighttime pain.

Conclusion

Over half of patients undergoing APM reported preoperative pain at night, which was associated with worse baseline functional scores. Postoperatively, >90% of patients with baseline pain at night noted resolution of symptoms by 2 years, with nearly 80% showing improvement by 3 months. Functional scores improved after surgery for patients with and without initial pain at night, remaining lower for patients who had preoperative nighttime pain.

Item-Specific Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Characterization of Patients With Medial Meniscus Root Tear

Background

Most studies regarding medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) report total Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscale values as important patient-reported outcomes, but there are few symptom-specific characterizations of patients with MMPRT.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to characterize the prevalence and severity of symptoms and functional limitations among patients with MMPRT based on item-level KOOS responses. It was hypothesized that patients with MMPRT would show similar symptoms to those of other meniscal tear types, with items from the KOOS pain subscale forming a majority of the most severe and prevalent symptoms.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

The records of 1466 patients with medial meniscus root tear between January 2017 and December 2021 at a single institution were reviewed. KOOS subscale scores and item-specific responses from initial evaluation were collected for each patient. Each KOOS item was scored on a scale from 1 (none/least severe) to 5 (extreme/most severe). Median and mean item-level responses were calculated and ranked in order of most to least severe. For statistical analysis, item-level prevalence rates were calculated as the proportion of patients reporting at least mild symptoms and ranked from most to least prevalent.

Results

Included were 61 patients with MMPRT verified on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The most severe items according to item-level KOOS response were as follows: awareness of knee problem (mean, 4.62 [95% CI, 4.47-4.78]), difficulty jumping (mean, 4.06 [95% CI, 3.73-4.39]), difficulty twisting or pivoting (mean, 4.04 [95% CI, 3.76-4.32]), difficulty kneeling (mean, 3.98 [95% CI, 3.65-4.31]), and modification of lifestyle (mean, 3.94 [95% CI, 3.69-4.20]). The most prevalent items were knee stiffness later in the day, pain going up- or downstairs, difficulty ascending stairs, difficulty getting in and out of the car, difficulty twisting or pivoting, awareness of knee problem, and modification of lifestyle, with all patients reporting at least mild symptoms for each. Of the 11 most severe and prevalent symptoms, 8 came from the KOOS-Pain item-specific responses.

Conclusion

Pain-related items made up a majority of the most severe and most prevalent symptoms as identified by the item-specific KOOS responses. However, meniscal symptoms commonly seen in other tear types, such as clicking and knee stiffness, were still quite prevalent in patients with MMPRT.

Knee arthroscopy has limited effects on relieving local symptoms of knee osteoarthritis: an analysis of data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative

BACKGROUND

Knee arthroscopy's efficacy in symptom improvement for knee osteoarthritis remains debated. In this study, we analyzed a multicenter database to investigate local symptom improvement.

METHODS

We extracted and analyzed the data of 163 patients from the Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort who underwent unilateral knee arthroscopy (UKA) and were followed up for at least 24 months. UKA patients were matched to non-UKA patients (n = 163) according to sex, age, abdominal circumference, and Kellgren-Lawrence grade. The verified KOOS questionnaires (knee catching, locking, grinding, or clicking) and common local symptoms (frequent knee pain, aching, or stiffness) were set as outcomes. Furthermore, we built a binary logistic regression model to examine the relationship between UKA and local symptom improvement and new-onset symptoms, adjusting for conservative therapeutic covariables (injection of steroids or transparent acid into the knee joint, oral chondroitin sulfate, amino glucose, or analgesics).

RESULT

Analysis showed that the UKA and non-UKA groups showed no obvious difference in the three knee symptoms, but the probability of new-onset grinding or clicking, and frequent knee pain, aching, or stiffness symptoms in the UKA group were respectively 5.82 and 5.65-fold higher than that in the non-UKA group. After analyzing conservative treatment data using a multiple imputation method, the results were consistent with previous regression analyses.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the non-UKA group, the UKA group showed no noticeable differences in the improvement of the three knee symptoms and showed an increased the probability of new-onset grinding or clicking and frequent knee pain, aching, or stiffness symptoms. Key Points • Knee arthroscopy may increase the probability of new-onset grinding or clicking and frequent knee pain, aching, or stiffness symptoms. • We found no difference in the improvement of local knee symptoms (knee catching, locking, grinding, clicking or frequent pain, aching, or stiffness) improvement between the two groups with or without knee arthroscopy.

Editorial Commentary: We Should Be Cautious About Using Catching and Locking as an Indication for Knee Arthroscopy: Mechanical Symptoms May Be Multifactorial in Their Causes

Knee arthroscopy may be offered as a treatment for mechanical (catching/locking, grinding/clicking) and meniscal (pain with twisting/pivoting) symptoms. Recent studies have found that mechanical symptoms, particularly catching/locking, may be multifactorial in their causes (chondral lesions, meniscal tears, loose bodies) and less responsive to arthroscopic meniscectomy. Surgeons should be aware of this evidence and adjust their surgical indications appropriately.

Grinding, Clicking, and Pivot Pain Resolve in Most Patients After Knee Arthroscopy

PURPOSE

To determine whether knee arthroscopy alleviates the symptom constellation of knee grinding/clicking, catching/locking, and pivot pain.

METHODS

One-year follow-up data from 584 consecutive subjects who underwent knee arthroscopy from August 2012 to December 2019 were collected prospectively. Subjects reported frequency of knee grinding/clicking, catching/locking, and/or pivot pain preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively. A single surgeon performed each procedure and documented all intraoperative pathology. We measured the postoperative resolution or persistence of these symptoms and used multivariable regression models to identify preoperative demographic and clinical variables that predicted symptom persistence. We also assessed changes in the Pain, Activities of Daily Living, and Quality of Life subscales of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

RESULTS

Postoperative symptom resolution was more likely for grinding/clicking (65.6%) and pivot pain (67.8%) than for catching/locking (44.1%). Smoking status, overweight/obesity, absence of meniscal tear, and number of compartments with focal cartilage lesions predicted persistence of 1 or more patient-reported knee symptoms. KOOS subscale scores consistently improved by at least one standard deviation. Individuals who had resolution of patient-reported knee symptoms exhibited roughly 2-fold improvements in KOOS Pain, ADL and Quality of Life scores compared with those whose symptoms persisted. Persistence of pivot pain was associated with the least improvement of the 3 KOOS subscales.

CONCLUSIONS

Two in three patients with grinding/clicking or pivot pain experience symptom resolution after knee arthroscopy, although catching/locking is more likely to persist. Smoking status, overweight/obesity, absence of meniscal tear, and number of compartments with focal cartilage lesions predict symptom persistence after knee arthroscopy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV, retrospective cohort analysis of prospective data.

Current Controversies in Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the continued controversy among orthopedic surgeons regarding the indications and benefits of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM), this review summarizes the current literature, indications, and outcomes of partial meniscectomy to treat symptomatic meniscal tears.

RECENT FINDINGS

In patients with symptomatic meniscal tears, the location and tear pattern play a vital role in clinical management. Tears in the central white-white zone are less amenable to repair due to poor vascularity. Patients may be indicated for APM or non-surgical intervention depending on the tear pattern and symptoms. Non-surgical management for meniscal pathology includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), physical therapy (PT), and intraarticular injections to reduce inflammation and relieve symptoms. There have been several landmark multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying the outcomes of APM compared to PT or sham surgery in symptomatic degenerative meniscal tears. These most notably include the 2013 Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) Trial, the 2018 ESCAPE trial, and the sham surgery-controlled Finnish Degenerative Meniscal Lesion Study (FIDELITY), which failed to identify substantial benefits of APM over nonoperative treatment or even placebo surgery. Despite an abundance of literature exploring outcomes of APM for degenerative meniscus tears, there is little consensus among surgeons about the drivers of good outcomes following APM. It is often difficult to determine if the presenting symptoms are secondary to the meniscus pathology or the degenerative disease in patients with concomitant OA. A central tenet of managing meniscal pathology is to preserve tissue whenever possible. Most RCTs show that exercise therapy may be non-inferior to APM in degenerative tears if repair is not possible. Given this evidence, patients who fail nonoperative treatment should be counseled regarding the risks of APM before proceeding to surgical management.

Mechanical symptoms and meniscal tear: a reappraisal

OBJECTIVE

To identify and summarize literature related to the association between mechanical symptoms (catching and locking of the knee), the presence of meniscal tear, and outcomes after arthroscopic surgery.

DESIGN

We searched PubMed and hand-searched reference lists for relevant articles and selected 38 for analysis.

RESULTS

Mechanical symptoms appear to have modest sensitivity (ranging 0.32-0.69), specificity (ranging 0.45-0.74) and positive predictive value (ranging 0.75-0.81) for meniscal tear. There is also very little evidence to suggest that those with mechanical symptoms experience better outcomes after arthroscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Our examination of the literature does not support the hypothesis that mechanical symptoms are related to the presence of meniscal tear or portend better outcomes after arthroscopic surgery.

Clinical Characteristics of 100 Patients with Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders and Shoulder Complaints With or Without Mechanical Symptoms: A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

The aims were to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD) and shoulder complaints with or without mechanical symptoms, and to compare characteristics between these groups.

DESIGN

Descriptive study.

SETTING

Primary care PARTICIPANTS: One-hundred patients with HSD and shoulder complaints for at least three months were included from primary care.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Medical history, self-reported (shoulder pain and function, discomfort due to other symptoms, fatigue, fear of movement, quality of life) and objective (strength, range of motion, proprioception) characteristics were collected by physiotherapists. Mechanical symptoms (Yes/No) were defined as self-reported shoulder instability, subluxation, and/or laxity.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven reported mechanical symptoms. Patients in both groups reported impairments related to shoulder pain, function, fatigue, fear of movement, and quality of life. Patients with mechanical symptoms were younger (mean (95% CI): 35.1 (32.3; 37.9) vs. 43.3 (38.4; 48.1) years), had longer symptom duration (median: 46 (36; 66) vs. 24 (9; 56) months), reported a previous shoulder dislocation (25% (16; 37) vs. 3% (0; 16)), experienced that their shoulder was loose (64% (52; 76) vs. 15% (5; 32)), and reported discomfort due to other symptoms (OR 1.48 (1.17; 1.87)). Furthermore, a larger proportion had received supplemental treatment (analgesic medication, steroid injection/surgery).

CONCLUSION(S)

Both groups with HSD and shoulder complaints presented with substantial shoulder-related impairments. Two-thirds reported mechanical symptoms, were younger, and more severely impaired than those without mechanical symptoms. These findings highlight the importance of managing mechanical shoulder symptoms to fully address the patients' impairments.

Predictors of the outcome of physiotherapy following a meniscus tear: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Physiotherapy is indicated for treatment of a painful degenerative knee meniscus tear. Predicting the outcome remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review was to identify which predictive factors are associated with the outcome of physiotherapy for degenerative knee meniscus tear.

METHODS

A systematic electronic literature search was undertaken of PubMed, CINAHL, Medline with AMED and EMBASE via Ovid from inception to July 2021. Studies of adults receiving physiotherapy which presented data on the association of baseline variables and the treatment outcome were included. Study quality was assessed using CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) tools. Data were narratively analysed.

RESULTS

1051 titles were retrieved and screened for eligibility. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies investigated just degenerative tears. The evidence-base was of low/moderate quality. Across all studies, seven and five studies (100%) reported no association between mechanical symptoms or gender respectively (p > 0.05). There was no association with osteoarthritis in 80%, age in 71%, or body mass index in 60% of studies (p > 0.05). Four studies (80%) reported that higher baseline pain was associated with cross-over to surgery, greater improvement with surgery or less improvement in pain score (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patient demographic characteristics provide minimal association with outcome following physiotherapy for degenerative meniscus tear. The evidence-base is limited in size and quality. A large adequately powered prospective cohort study investigating a broad range of predictive factors is warranted to develop a predictive model to better stratify those most likely to benefit from physiotherapy.

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: did it ever work?

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is one the most common orthopedic surgical procedures. The most common indication for APM is a degenerative meniscal tear (DMT). High-quality evidence suggests that APM does not provide meaningful benefits in patients with DMTs and may even be harmful in the longer term. This narrative review focuses on a fundamental question: considering the history and large number of these surgeries, has APM ever actually worked in patients with DMT? A truly effective treatment needs a valid disease model that would biologically and plausibly explain the perceived treatment benefits. In the case of DMT, effectiveness requires a credible framework for the pain-generating process, which should be influenced by APM. Basic research, pathoanatomy, and clinical evidence gives no support to these frameworks. Moreover, treatment of DMT with an APM does not align with the traditional practice of medicine since DMT is not a reliable diagnosis for knee pain and no evidence-based indication exists that would influence patient prognosis from APM. A plausible and robust explanation supported by both basic research and clinical evidence is that DMTs are part of an osteoarthritic disease process and do not contribute to the symptoms independently or in isolation and that symptoms are not treatable with APM. This is further supported by the fact that APM as an intervention is paradoxical because the extent of procedure and severity of disease are both inversely associated with outcome. We argue that arthroscopic treatment of DMT is largely based on a logical fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Meniscal and Mechanical Symptoms Are Associated with Cartilage Damage, Not Meniscal Pathology

BACKGROUND

Traditionally defined "meniscal" and "mechanical" symptoms are thought to arise from meniscal tears. Yet meniscal tears and cartilage damage commonly coexist in symptomatic knees. To better characterize the primary driver of these symptoms, we investigated whether the presence of preoperative patient-reported knee symptoms (PRKS), including knee catching/locking, grinding/clicking/popping, and pain with pivoting, are associated with various intra-articular pathological conditions diagnosed at knee arthroscopy.

METHODS

We collected prospective data from 565 consecutive patients who underwent knee arthroscopy from 2012 to 2019 and had PRKS collected via the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire. The diagnosis of meniscal pathology and concomitant cartilage damage was confirmed and classified intraoperatively. We used multivariable regression models, adjusting for possible confounders, to examine the association of specific pathological conditions of the knee with the presence of preoperative PRKS.

RESULTS

Tricompartmental cartilage damage was strongly associated with significantly worse PRKS, with an increase of 0.33 point (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08 to 0.58; p = 0.01) on a 0 to 4-point scale. We did not observe an association between meniscal pathology and preoperative PRKS.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to current dogma, this study demonstrates that traditionally defined "meniscal" and "mechanical" knee symptoms are strongly associated with the burden and severity of underlying cartilage damage rather than with specific meniscal pathology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Common Injuries of the Weekend Athlete

Each year increasing numbers of people participate in a wider variety of athletic endeavors. Unlike previous generations, many patients remain in these activities later into their lives, some well beyond retirement. As the population ages and their activities continue, they are subject to injury of various forms affecting all aspects of their bodies.