Cost-Effectiveness of Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy and Physical Therapy for Degenerative Meniscal Tear.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for concomitant meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involving arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and physical therapy (PT). METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo microsimulation, to compare three strategies, 1) PT-only, 2) immediate surgery, and 3) PT + optional surgery, for participants whose pain persists following initial PT. We modeled a cohort with baseline meniscal tear, OA, and demographics from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus PT. We estimated risks and costs of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy complications and accounted for heightened OA progression post surgery using published data. We estimated surgery use rates and treatment efficacies using MeTeOR data. We considered a 5-year time horizon, discounted costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) 3% per year and conducted sensitivity analyses. We report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: Relative to PT-only, PT + optional surgery added 0.0651 QALY and $2,010 over 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $30,900 per QALY). Relative to PT + optional surgery, immediate surgery added 0.0065 QALY and $3080 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $473,800 per QALY). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were sensitive to optional surgery efficacy in the PT + optional surgery strategy. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PT + optional surgery was cost-effective in 51% of simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of both $50,000 per QALY and $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: First-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has a prohibitively high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Under base case assumptions, second-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy offered to participants with persistent pain following initial PT is cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds between $31,000 and $473,000 per QALY. Our analyses suggest that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy can be a high-value treatment option for patients with meniscal tear and OA when performed following an initial PT course and should remain a covered treatment option.

Association Between Baseline Meniscal Symptoms and Outcomes of Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Meniscal Tear in Patients With Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with meniscal tears reporting meniscal symptoms such as catching or locking have traditionally undergone arthroscopy. The present study was undertaken to investigate whether patients with meniscal tears who report meniscal symptoms have greater improvement with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) than physical therapy (PT). METHODS: We used data from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial, which randomized participants with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and meniscal tear to APM or PT. The frequency of each meniscal symptom (clicking, catching, popping, intermittent locking, giving way, swelling) was measured at baseline and 6 months. We used linear regression models to determine whether the difference in improvement in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain score at 6 months between patients treated with APM versus PT was modified by the presence of each meniscal symptom. We also determined the percentage of participants with resolution of meniscal symptoms by treatment group. RESULTS: We included 287 participants. The presence (versus absence) of any of the meniscal symptoms did not modify the improvement in KOOS pain score between APM versus PT by >0.5 SD (all P interaction >0.05). APM led to greater resolution of intermittent locking and clicking than PT (locking 70% versus 46%, clicking 41% versus 25%). No difference in resolution of the other meniscal symptoms was observed. CONCLUSION: Meniscal symptoms were not associated with improved pain relief. Although symptoms of clicking and intermittent locking had a greater reduction in the APM group, the presence of meniscal symptoms in isolation should not inform clinical decisions surrounding APM versus PT in patients with meniscal tear and knee OA.

Influence of Baseline Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features on Outcome of Arthroscopic Meniscectomy and Physical Therapy Treatment of Meniscal Tears in Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is used to treat meniscal tears, although its efficacy is controversial. PURPOSE: This study used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to determine characteristics that lead to greater benefit from APM and physical therapy (PT) than from PT alone among patients with meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Using data from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial, the authors first assessed whether the effect of treatment on pain scores at 6 months differed according to baseline MRI features (bone marrow lesions, cartilage and meniscal damage). Second, the authors summed MRI features associated with differential pain relief between APM and PT to create a "damage score," which included bone marrow lesion number and cartilage damage size with possible values of 0 (least damage), 1 (moderate), and 2 (greatest). The authors used linear models to determine whether the association between damage score and pain relief at 6 months differed for APM versus PT. RESULTS: The study included 220 participants: 13%, had the least damage; 52%, moderate; and 34%, greatest. Although treatment type did not significantly modify the association of damage score and change in pain ( P interaction = .13), those with the least damage and moderate damage had greater improvement with APM than with PT in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain subscale-by 15 and 7 points, respectively. Those with the greatest damage had a similar improvement with APM and PT. CONCLUSION: Among patients with osteoarthritis and meniscal tear, those with less intra-articular damage on MRI may have greater improvement in pain with APM and PT than with PT alone. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously owing to the limited sample size.

The TeMPO trial (treatment of meniscal tears in osteoarthritis): rationale and design features for a four arm randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Meniscal tears often accompany knee osteoarthritis, a disabling condition affecting 14 million individuals in the United States. While several randomized controlled trials have compared physical therapy to surgery for individuals with knee pain, meniscal tear, and osteoarthritic changes (determined via radiographs or magnetic resonance imaging), no trial has evaluated the efficacy of physical therapy alone in these subjects. METHODS: The Treatment of Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis (TeMPO) Trial is a four-arm multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial designed to establish the comparative efficacy of two in-clinic physical therapy interventions (one focused on strengthening and one containing placebo) and two protocolized home exercise programs. DISCUSSION: The goal of this paper is to present the rationale behind TeMPO and describe the study design and implementation strategies, focusing on methodologic and clinical challenges. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The TeMPO Trial was first registered at clinicaltrials.gov with registration No. NCT03059004 . on February 14, 2017.

Predictors and Outcomes of Crossover to Surgery from Physical Therapy for Meniscal Tear and Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Trial Comparing Physical Therapy and Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) combined with physical therapy (PT) have yielded pain relief similar to that provided by PT alone in randomized trials of subjects with a degenerative meniscal tear. However, many patients randomized to PT received APM before assessment of the primary outcome. We sought to identify factors associated with crossing over to APM and to compare pain relief between patients who had crossed over to APM and those who had been randomized to APM. METHODS: We used data from the MeTeOR (Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research) Trial of APM with PT versus PT alone in subjects ≥45 years old who had mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis and a degenerative meniscal tear. We assessed independent predictors of crossover to APM among those randomized to PT. We also compared pain relief at 6 months among those randomized to PT who crossed over to APM, those who did not cross over, and those originally randomized to APM. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four subjects were randomized to and received APM and 177 were randomized to PT, of whom 48 (27%) crossed over to receive APM in the first 140 days after randomization. In multivariate analyses, factors associated with a higher likelihood of crossing over to APM among those who had originally been randomized to PT included a baseline Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Score of ≥40 (risk ratio [RR] = 1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00, 3.93) and symptom duration of <1 year (RR = 1.74; 95% CI = 0.98, 3.08). Eighty-one percent of subjects who crossed over to APM and 82% of those randomized to APM had an improvement of ≥10 points in their pain score at 6 months, as did 73% of those who were randomized to and received only PT. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects who crossed over to APM had presented with a shorter symptom duration and greater baseline pain than those who did not cross over from PT. Subjects who crossed over had rates of surgical success similar to those of the patients who had been randomized to surgery. Our findings also suggest that an initial course of rigorous PT prior to APM may not compromise surgical outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Surgery versus physical therapy for a meniscal tear and osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Whether arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for symptomatic patients with a meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis results in better functional outcomes than nonoperative therapy is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving symptomatic patients 45 years of age or older with a meniscal tear and evidence of mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis on imaging. We randomly assigned 351 patients to surgery and postoperative physical therapy or to a standardized physical-therapy regimen (with the option to cross over to surgery at the discretion of the patient and surgeon). The patients were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was the difference between the groups with respect to the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical-function score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms) 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean improvement in the WOMAC score after 6 months was 20.9 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.9 to 23.9) in the surgical group and 18.5 (95% CI, 15.6 to 21.5) in the physical-therapy group (mean difference, 2.4 points; 95% CI, -1.8 to 6.5). At 6 months, 51 active participants in the study who were assigned to physical therapy alone (30%) had undergone surgery, and 9 patients assigned to surgery (6%) had not undergone surgery. The results at 12 months were similar to those at 6 months. The frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, we did not find significant differences between the study groups in functional improvement 6 months after randomization; however, 30% of the patients who were assigned to physical therapy alone underwent surgery within 6 months. (Funded by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00597012.).

The MeTeOR trial (Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research): rationale and design features.

This paper presents the rationale and design features of the MeTeOR Trial (Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research; Clinical Trials.gov NCT00597012). MeTeOR is an NIH-funded seven-center prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to establish the efficacy of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy combined with a standardized physical therapy program as compared with a standardized physical therapy program alone in patients with a symptomatic meniscal tear in the setting of mild to moderate knee osteoarthritic change (OA). The design and execution of a trial that compares surgery with a nonoperative treatment strategy presents distinctive challenges. The goal of this paper is to provide the clinical rationale for MeTeOR and to highlight salient design features, with particular attention to those that present clinical and methodologic challenges.