Meniscal allograft transplantation: A matched-pair analysis reveals worse sport activity level but similar clinical improvement and survival in women compared to men.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess how gender might affect the clinical outcome and survival of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). METHODS: A total of 358 patients (23.2% women, 76.8% men) were treated with fresh-frozen nonirradiated allografts implantated arthroscopically using a single- or double-tunnel technique without bone plugs and peripheral suture to the capsule with 'all-inside' stitches. RESULTS: Patients were evaluated at baseline and 2-year follow-up with the Lysholm score, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales and Tegner score. Women presented higher body mass index (p < 0.0005), poorer baseline VAS (p = 0.012), Lysholm score (p = 0.005), KOOS symptom (p = 0.034) and KOOS pain (p = 0.030), Tegner score (preinjury and basal, p < 0.0001 and p = 0.002, respectively), a lower number of previous (p = 0.039) and concurrent (p = 0.001) anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions and a higher number of concurrent procedures (p = 0.032) and distal femoral osteotomies (p = 0.024). Worse results were documented in women at 2 years, with lower Lysholm score (p = 0.024) and Tegner score (p = 0.007) and a lower clinical survival rate (p = 0.03) (67.5% vs. 82.2%) in the overall patient cohort. However, the matched-pair analysis only confirmed a lower Tegner score value at 2 years (p = 0.016), while underlying the interplay of sex, age and concomitant cartilage lesions in determining the clinical outcome. The analysis of this large series of patients affected by postmeniscectomy syndrome and treated with MAT revealed gender differences. CONCLUSION: While both genders benefited from a significant improvement, the female population presents more often with older age, concomitant cartilage lesions and a lower activity level, all factors contributing towards a lower clinical success after MAT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, comparative study.

Donor age has no relevant role in biomechanical properties of allografts used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Surgeons generally consider the donor age as a factor that negatively influences the quality of allograft used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, however, the available evidence does not clearly support this statement. The purpose of the study was to investigate if donor age influences the biomechanical properties of allografts used in ACL reconstruction. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for all relevant articles using MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Cochrane Collaboration Library, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Studies including the analysis of the correlation between biomechanical properties of the allografts and donor age were selected. The role of donor age was labelled as 'none' if absent, 'higher' or 'lower' if the properties were higher or lower in older specimens with respect to younger. The correlation was defined as 'weak' or 'strong' according to each study definition. RESULTS: No conflicting role of donor age was reported for modulus of elasticity, load to failure, strain, stiffness and displacement. The only parameters where the significant results were consistent were the tensile strength and the stress (low or moderate correlations). When considering the tested samples with a donor's age <65 years, a significant role of age was reported in only four out of 13 groups of graft tested (patellar tendon, fascia lata, anterior tibialis tendon and posterior tibialis tendon). CONCLUSION: The current literature did not allow to state that the donor age negatively influences the biomechanical properties of allografts, making it impossible to identify a clear age cut-off value to exclude them from ACL reconstruction procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review.

Long-term results after medial patellotibial ligament reconstruction for the treatment of patellofemoral instability.

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term clinical outcomes and redislocation rate after medial patellotibial ligament reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 26 knees with mean age 26.3 ± 10.6 years (25 patients, 7 males and 18 females) treated for patellar instability (at least two objective dislocations) with medialization of the patellar tendon medial third were evaluated with an intermediate clinical follow-up (FU) at a mean of 6.5 ± 2.1 years and with a final telephone interview follow-up at mean of 15.6 ± 2.5 years (11.4-20.1). Western Ontario and MacMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Kujala, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and Tegner activity scores were used. Information about further redislocation and knee surgery was also collected. RESULTS: All the clinical scores had a significant improvement compared to preoperative status (WOMAC pre-op 55.9 ± 27.2 vs. WOMAC final FU 80.8 ± 22.2; KUJALA pre-op 41.0 ± 24.0 vs. KUJALA final FU 77.2 ± 24.1; VAS pre-op 6.0 ± 3.1 vs. VAS final FU 3.44 ± 2.35; TEGNER pre-op 2.1 ± 2.0 vs. TEGNER final FU 3.6 ± 1.8; p < 0.001), and the outcomes remained stable at the final follow-up compared to the intermediate follow-up (p > 0.05). A total of 4 knees had at least one redislocation at the final follow-up, while 3 knees underwent total knee replacement surgery. The redislocation-survival rate at 5 years is 92%, meanwhile is 84% at 10 and 15 years. CONCLUSIONS: MPTL reconstruction produced good clinical results and a survival rate of 84% at a mean of 16 years follow-up and could be considered as associated procedure in case of patellofemoral instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Clinical Outcomes of Medial Meniscal Allograft Transplantation With or Without High Tibial Osteotomy: A Case-Control Study Up to 8 Years of Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Satisfactory clinical results of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) have been reported in recent years. However, it remains unclear whether the clinical outcomes of MAT when combined with an osteotomy are inferior to those of isolated MAT. PURPOSE: To compare the survival rates and clinical outcomes of patients who received isolated medial MAT with those of patients undergoing medial MAT combined with high tibial osteotomy (HTO). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 55 patients underwent arthroscopic medial MAT using the soft tissue technique and HTO (mean age, 41.3 ± 10.4 years; 9 female); after fuzzy case-control matching on demographics, 55 controls who underwent isolated medial MAT were also included. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with surgical failure, clinical failure (Lysholm score, <65), and reoperation as endpoints. Subjective clinical scores were collected preoperatively and at the final follow-up. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 5.4 years, up to 8 years. All outcomes significantly improved at the last follow-up (P < .001). No differences were identified between MAT and MAT + HTO groups preoperatively and at the last follow-up (P > .05). At the final follow-up, 8 of 55 (14.5%) of the MAT + HTO patients and 9 of 55 (16.4%) of the MAT patients had a Lysholm score <65 (P = .885). Overall, 90% of the patients declared they would repeat the surgery regardless of the combined procedure. Surgical failure was identified in 6 of 110 (5.5%) patients: 5 of 55 (9.1%) in the MAT + HTO group and 1 of 55 (1.8%) in the MAT group (P = .093). Clinical failure was identified in 19 of 110 (17.3%) patients: 11 of 55 (20%) in the MAT + HTO group and 8 of 55 (14.5%) in the MAT group (P = .447). A significantly lower survivorship from surgical failure was identified in the MAT + HTO group (hazard ratio, 5.1; P = .049), while no differences in survivorship from reoperation and clinical failure were identified (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing medial MAT + HTO showed similar clinical results to patients undergoing isolated medial MAT at midterm follow-up, and thus a surgically addressed malalignment does not represent a contraindication for medial MAT. However, the need for a concomitant HTO is associated with a slightly higher failure rate over time.