Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
No Differences in 2-Year Reoperation Rates for Meniscus Allograft Transplant With Concomitant Cartilage Restoration or Osteotomy: A National Database Study.
Park, Anna L; Feeley, Brian T; Zhang, Alan L; Ma, C Benjamin; Lansdown, Drew A.
Afiliação
  • Park AL; University of California-San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California, U.S.A.. Electronic address: Anna.Park@ucsf.edu.
  • Feeley BT; University of California-San Francisco, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
  • Zhang AL; University of California-San Francisco, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
  • Ma CB; University of California-San Francisco, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
  • Lansdown DA; University of California-San Francisco, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy ; 2024 Jun 22.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38914300
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To investigate reoperation rates after meniscus allograft transplant (MAT), comparing rates with and without concomitant articular cartilage and osteotomy procedures using a national insurance claims database.

METHODS:

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent MAT from 2010 to 2021 with a minimum 2-year follow-up using the PearlDiver database. Using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases codes, we identified patients who underwent concomitant procedures including chondroplasty or microfracture, cartilage restoration defined as osteochondral graft or autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), or osteotomy. Univariate logistic regressions identified risk factors for reoperation. Reoperations were classified as knee arthroplasty, interventional procedures, or diagnostic or debridement procedures.

RESULTS:

The study included 750 patients with an average age of 29.6 years (interquartile range 21.0-36.8) and average follow-up time was 5.41 years (SD 2.51). Ninety-day, 2-year, and all-time reoperation rates were 1.33%, 14.4%, and 27.6%, respectively. MAT with cartilage restoration was associated with increased reoperation rate at 90 days (odds ratio 4.88; 95% confidence interval 1.38-19.27; P = .015); however, there was no significant difference in reoperation rates at 2 years or to the end of follow-up. ACI had increased reoperation rates at 90 days (odds ratio 6.95; 95% confidence interval 1.45-25.96; P = .006), with no difference in reoperation rates 2 years postoperatively or to the end of follow-up. Osteochondral autograft and allograft were not associated with increased reoperation rates.

CONCLUSIONS:

In our cohort, 14.4% of patients had a reoperation within 2 years of MAT. Nearly 1 in 4 patients undergoing MAT had concomitant cartilage restoration, showing that it is commonly performed on patients with articular cartilage damage. Concomitant osteochondral autograft, osteochondral allograft, chondroplasty, microfracture, and osteotomy were not associated with any significant difference in reoperation rates. ACI was associated with increased reoperation rates at 90 days, but not later. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arthroscopy Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arthroscopy Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article