Meniscal Transplant surgery or Optimised Rehabilitation full randomised trial (MeTeOR2): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Pain and disability after meniscectomy can be a substantial lifelong problem. There are few treatment options, especially for young people. Non-surgical management (rehabilitation) is an option but increasingly surgeons are performing meniscal allograft transplants (MATs) for these individuals. However, this is still an uncommon procedure, and availability and usage of MAT vary widely both in the UK and internationally. It is not known which treatment option is the most effective and cost-effective. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Meniscal Transplant surgery or Optimised Rehabilitation trial is an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The aim is to compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of MAT versus an optimised package of individualised, progressive, rehabilitation that we have called personalised knee therapy (PKT).Participants will be recruited from sites across the UK, Australia, Canada and Belgium. The planned 144 participants provide at least 90% power to detect a 10-point difference in the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4) at 24-months post randomisation (primary outcome). A prospectively planned economic evaluation will be conducted from a healthcare system and personal social services perspective. Secondary outcome data including health utility, occupational status, sports participation, mental well-being, further treatment, and adverse events will be collected at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis and reported in-line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the London-Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee on 19 August 2022 (22/LO/0327) and Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee, NSW, Australia on the 13 March 2023 (2022/ETH01890).Trial results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, in lay summaries and using social media as appropriate.This protocol adheres to the recommended Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) checklist. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87336549.

Higher odds of meniscectomy compared with meniscus repair in a young patient population with increased neighbourhood disadvantage.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of demographic and socioeconomic factors on the management of isolated meniscus tears in young patients and to identify trends in surgical management of meniscus tears based on surgeon volume. METHODS: Data from a large healthcare system on patients aged 14-44 years who underwent isolated meniscus surgery between 2016 and 2022 were analysed. Patient demographics, socioeconomic factors and surgeon volume were recorded. Patient age was categorised as 14-29 years and 30-44 years old. Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a measure of neighbourhood disadvantage with increased ADI corresponding to more disadvantage, was grouped as <25th, 25-75th and >75th percentile. Multivariate comparisons were made between procedure groups while univariate comparisons were made between surgeon groups. RESULTS: The study included 1552 patients treated by 84 orthopaedic surgeons. Older age and higher ADI were associated with higher odds of undergoing meniscectomy. Patients of older age and with non-private insurance were more likely to undergo treatment by a lower-volume knee surgeon. Apart from the year 2022, higher-volume knee surgeons performed significantly higher rates of meniscus repair compared with lower-volume knee surgeons. When controlling for surgeon volume, higher ADI remained a significant predictor of undergoing meniscectomy over meniscus repair. CONCLUSION: Significant associations exist between patient factors and surgical choices for isolated meniscus tears in younger patients. Patients of older age and with increased neighbourhood disadvantage were more likely to undergo meniscectomy versus meniscus repair. While higher-volume knee surgeons favoured meniscus repair, a growing trend of meniscus repair rates was observed among lower-volume knee surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study, level III.

Is Arthroscopic Meniscectomy Associated With an Increased Risk of Total Knee Arthroplasty for Claimants in the Workers' Compensation System? A 10-Year Study of Workers' Compensation Claims From a Large Nationwide Workers' Compensation Insurance Carrier.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a commonly performed knee surgery and prior arthroscopic meniscectomy (AM) has been linked to an increased risk of TKA in the general population. OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between AM and TKA among injured workers whose medical care is paid for under workers' compensation (WC). METHOD: A total of 17,247 lost-time claims depicting all arthroscopic knee surgical procedures performed from 2007 to 2017 were followed to the end of 2022 and analyzed. RESULTS: The odds ratio of undergoing a TKA for those with a preceding AM is 2.20, controlling for age, sex, and attorney involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Undergoing an AM is associated with an increased risk of TKA in WC claimants.

Cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy for traumatic meniscal tears in patients aged under 45 years.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears. Methods: We conducted a multicentre, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial in patients aged 18 to 45 years, with a recent onset, traumatic, MRI-verified, isolated meniscal tear without knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or standardized physical therapy with an optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy after three months of follow-up. We performed a cost-utility analysis on the randomization groups to compare both treatments over a 24-month follow-up period. Cost utility was calculated as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared to physical therapy. Calculations were performed from a healthcare system perspective and a societal perspective. Results: A total of 100 patients were included: 49 were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and 51 to physical therapy. In the physical therapy group, 21 patients (41%) received delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy during follow-up. Over 24 months, patients in the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group had a mean 0.005 QALYs lower quality of life (95% confidence interval -0.13 to 0.14). The cost-utility ratio was €-160,000/QALY from the healthcare perspective and €-223,372/QALY from the societal perspective, indicating that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy incurs additional costs without any added health benefit. Conclusion: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is unlikely to be cost-effective in treating young patients with isolated traumatic meniscal tears compared to physical therapy as a primary health intervention. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy leads to a similar quality of life, but higher costs, compared to physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.

In-office needle arthroscopy is a cost-effective alternative for operating room diversion in medial meniscectomy: a financial analysis.

BACKGROUND: In-office needle arthroscopy (IONA) has been described as a diagnostic alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for intra-articular pathology. However, few studies have analyzed its impact on cost and wait times when used as a therapeutic intervention. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact on cost and wait times associated with offering IONA for partial medial meniscectomy as an alternative to traditional operating room (OR) arthroscopy for patients with irreparable medial meniscus tears on MRI. METHODS: Two models were created comparing the existing care pathway (current state) to a proposed future state utilizing IONA. Data sources were accounting data from an academically affiliated hospital in Canada and supplemented with literature values. A Monte Carlo simulation combined with DuPont analysis running 10,000 simulations was conducted to calculate the revenue, expenses, profits, and effect on surgical waitlists (i.e., throughput) between the states. Sensitivity analyses examined the influence of patient preference and revision rates on profit and throughput. Two-sample Student's t test was performed (p < .05). RESULTS: An average of 198 (standard deviation (SD) 31) patients underwent arthroscopic meniscectomy or repair each year from 2016 to 2020. The IONA revision rate was calculated as 20.3%. Compared to the current state, annual expenses in the IONA pathway were significantly reduced ($266,912.68 versus $281,415.23, p < .0001), while improving throughput by 21.2% (3.54%). Sensitivity analysis revealed 10% of patients need to select IONA over traditional OR arthroscopy with the revision rate remaining below 40% for the proposed state profit to be higher than the current state. CONCLUSIONS: IONA is a cost-effective alternative to traditional OR arthroscopy in patients undergoing partial medial meniscectomy. The next steps are to assess patients' perceptions of IONA as an alternative to traditional OR arthroscopy, and to carry out clinical trials to determine the efficacy, patient-reported outcome metrics, and complications of IONA.

The value of reducing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in the treatment of degenerative meniscus tears: a budget impact analysis.

AIMS: Numerous studies have shown that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is not (cost-) effective in patients with symptoms attributed to a degenerative meniscus tear. We aimed to assess the budget impact of reducing APM in routine clinical practice in this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A patient-level state transition model was developed to simulate patients recently diagnosed with a degenerative meniscus tear. Three strategies were compared: "current guideline" (i.e., postpone surgery to at least 3 months after diagnosis), "APM at any time" (i.e., APM available directly after diagnosis), and "nonsurgical" (i.e., APM no longer performed). Total societal costs over 5 years were calculated to determine the budget impact. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to address uncertainty. RESULTS: The average cost per patient over 5 years were EUR 5,077, EUR 4,577, and EUR 4,218, for the "APM at any time," "current guideline," and "nonsurgical" strategy, respectively. Removing APM from the treatment mix (i.e., 30,000 patients per year) in the Netherlands, resulted in a reduction in health care expenditures of EUR 54 million (95 percent confidence interval [CI] EUR 38 million-EUR 70 million) compared to the "current guideline strategy" and EUR 129 million (95 percent CI EUR 102 million-EUR 156 million) compared to the "APM at any time" strategy. Sensitivity analyses showed that uncertainty did not alter our conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial costs can be saved when APM is no longer performed to treat symptoms attributed to degenerative meniscus tears in the Netherlands. It is therefore recommended to further reduce the use of APM to treat degenerative meniscus tears.

Health-economic evaluation of meniscus tear treatments: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the overall evidence of published health-economic evaluation studies on meniscus tear treatment. METHODS: Our systematic review focuses on health-economic evaluation studies of meniscus tear treatment interventions found in PubMed and Embase databases. A qualitative, descriptive approach was used to analyze the studies' results and systematically report them following PRISMA guidelines. The health-economic evaluation method for each included study was categorized following one of the four approaches: partial economic evaluation (PEE), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-benefit analysis (CBA), or cost-utility analysis (CUA). The quality of each included study was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list. Comparisons of input variables and outcomes were made, if applicable. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included; of these, six studies performed PEE, seven studies CUA, two studies CEA, and one study combined CBA, CUA, and CEA. The following economic comparisons were analyzed and showed the respective comparative outcomes: (1) meniscus repair was more cost-effective than arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (meniscectomy) for reparable meniscus tear; (2) non-operative treatment or physical therapy was less costly than meniscectomy for degenerative meniscus tear; (3) physical therapy with delayed meniscectomy was more cost-effective than early meniscectomy for meniscus tear with knee osteoarthritis; (4) meniscectomy without physical therapy was less costly than meniscectomy with physical therapy; (5) meniscectomy was more cost-effective than either meniscus allograft transplantation or meniscus scaffold procedure; (6) the conventional arthroscopic instrument cost was lower than laser-assisted arthroscopy in meniscectomy procedures. CONCLUSION: Results from this review suggest that meniscus repair is the most cost-effective intervention for reparable meniscus tears. Physical therapy followed by delayed meniscectomy is the most cost-effective intervention for degenerative meniscus tears. Meniscus scaffold should be avoided, especially when implemented on a large scale. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of level IV studies.

Biomechanical assessment of a novel meniscal scaffold compared to partial meniscectomy: A study on porcine meniscal injury.

This study aimed to investigate the appropriate size of scaffold implantation on stress distribution and evaluate its mechanical and biomechanical properties considering hydrolysis. The meniscus acts as a load distribution in the knee, and its biomechanical properties are essential for the development of the PGA scaffold. We established a novel meniscal scaffold, which consists of polyglycolic acid (PGA) covered with L-lactide-ε-caprolactone copolymer (P[LA/CL]). After 4 weeks of hydrolysis, the scaffold had a 7% volume reduction compared to the initial volume. In biomechanical tests, the implantation of scaffolds 20% larger than the circumferential and vertical defect size results in greater contact stress than the intact meniscus. In the mechanical evaluation associated with the decomposition behavior, the strength decreased after 4 weeks of hydrolysis. Meanwhile, in the biomechanical test considering hydrolysis, contact stress and area equivalent to intact were obtained after 4 weeks of hydrolysis. In conclusion, the implantation of the PGA scaffold might be a useful alternative to partial meniscectomy in terms of mechanical properties, and the PGA scaffold should be implanted up to 20% of the defect size.

Patient Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors Associated With Physical Therapy Utilization After Uncomplicated Meniscectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The extent to which physical therapy (PT) is used after meniscectomy is unknown. The objective of this study was to estimate the extent to which PT is implemented after meniscectomy and to identify factors associated with its utilization. METHODS: The Mariner PearlDiver database was queried to identify patients who underwent uncomplicated meniscectomy. The number of PT visits for each patient was tabulated. Logistic regressions were used to compare demographic factors associated with no use of PT and use of nine or more PT visits. RESULTS: In total, 92,291 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 72.21% did not use PT and 27.8% used 1 or more PT visits. Of the patients who used PT, 19.76% had 1 to 8 PT visits and 8.03% had 9 or more PT visits. Older age and noncommercial insurance types were associated with no PT use. Male sex, Medicaid, and Medicare were associated with markedly lower odds of increased PT utilization. CONCLUSION: PT is used in the minority of the time after meniscectomy. Among patients who do use PT, however, notable variation exists in the amount of PT visits used. Patient age, sex, insurance status, and geographic variables were independently associated with PT utilization.

A Prospective Assessment of Knee Arthroscopy Skills Between Medical Students and Residents-Simulator Exercises for Partial Meniscectomy and Analysis of Learning Curves.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic has created the largest disruption of education in history. In a response to this, we aimed to evaluate the knee arthroscopy learning curve among medical students and orthopaedic residents. METHODS: An arthroscopy simulator was used to compare the learning curves of two groups. Medical students with any prior knowledge of arthroscopy (n=24) were compared to a residents group (n=16). Analyzed parameters were "time to complete a task," assessment of the movement of tools and values scoring damage to the surrounding tissues. RESULTS: After several repetitions, both groups improved their skills in terms of time and movement. Residents were on average faster, had less camera movement, and touched the cartilage tissue less often than did students. Students showed a steeper improvement curve than residents for certain parameters, as they started from a different experience level. CONCLUSION: The participants were able to reduce the time to complete a task. There was also a decrease in possible damage to the virtual surrounding tissues. In general, the residents had better mean values, but the students had the steeper learning curve. Particularly less experienced surgeons can especially train their hand-eye coordination skills required for arthroscopy surgery. Training simulators are an important training tool that supplements cadaveric training and participation in arthroscopic operations and should be included in training.

Assessment of changes in the meniscus and subchondral bone in a novel closed-joint impact and surgical reconstruction lapine model.

Despite reconstruction surgery to repair a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), patients often still show signs of post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) years following the procedure. The goal of this study was to document changes in the meniscus and subchondral bone due to closed-joint impact and surgical reconstruction in a lapine model. Animals received insult to the joint followed by surgical reconstruction of the ACL and partial meniscectomy. Following euthanasia of the animals at 1, 3, and 6-months post-impact, meniscal tissue was assessed for changes in morphology, mechanical properties and proteoglycan content. Femurs and tibias were scanned via micro-computed tomography to determine changes in bone quality, morphometry, and formation of osteophytes. Both the lateral and medial menisci showed severe degradation and tearing at all-time points, with higher degree of degeneration being observed at 6-months. Decreases in both the instantaneous and equilibrium modulus were documented in both menisci. Minimal changes were found in bone quality and morphometry, with most change documented in the tibia. Bones from the reconstructed limbs showed large volumes of osteophyte formations, with an increase in volume over time. The initial changes that were representative of PTOA may have been limited to the meniscus, but at later time points consistent changes due to the disease were seen in both tissues. This study, which builds on a previous study by this laboratory, suggests that the addition of surgical reconstruction of the ACL to our model was not sufficient to prevent the development of PTOA.

First Clinical Application of Polyurethane Meniscal Scaffolds with Mesenchymal Stem Cells and Assessment of Cartilage Quality with T2 Mapping at 12 Months.

BACKGROUND: Complex meniscal lesions often require meniscectomy with favorable results in the short term but a high risk of early osteoarthritis subsequently. Partial meniscectomy treated with meniscal substitutes may delay articular cartilage degeneration. PURPOSE: To evaluate the status of articular cartilage by T2 mapping after meniscal substitution with polyurethane scaffolds enriched with mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) and comparison with acellular scaffolds at 12 months. METHODS: Seventeen patients (18-50 years) with past meniscectomies were enrolled in 2 groups: (1) acellular polyurethane scaffold (APS) or (2) polyurethane scaffold enriched with MSC (MPS). Patients in the MPS group received filgrastim to stimulate MSC production, and CD90+ cells were obtained and cultured in the polyurethane scaffold. The scaffolds were implanted arthroscopically into partial meniscus defects. Concomitant injuries (articular cartilage lesions or cartilage lesions) were treated during the same procedure. Changes in the quality of articular cartilage were evaluated with T2 mapping in femur and tibia at 12 months. RESULTS: In tibial T2 mapping, values for the MPS group increased slightly at 9 months but returned to initial values at 12 months (P > 0.05). In the APS group, a clear decrease from 3 months to 12 months was observed (P > 0.05). This difference tended to be significantly lower in the APS group compared with the MPS group at the final time point (P = 0.18). In the femur, a slight increase in the MPS group (47.8 ± 3.4) compared with the APS group (45.3 ± 4.9) was observed (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Meniscal substitution with polyurethane scaffold maintains normal T2 mapping values in adjacent cartilage at 12 months. The addition of MSC did not show any advantage in the protection of articular cartilage over acellular scaffolds (P > 0.05).

Increased Prevalence and Associated Costs of Psychiatric Comorbidities in Patients Undergoing Sports Medicine Operative Procedures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence of preoperatively diagnosed psychiatric comorbidities and the impact of these comorbidities on the healthcare costs of ten common orthopaedic sports medicine procedures. METHODS: Patients undergoing 10 common sports medicine procedures from 2007 to 2017q1 were identified using the Humana claims database. These procedures included anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; medial collateral ligament repair/reconstruction; Achilles repair/reconstruction; Rotator cuff repair; meniscectomy/meniscus repair; hip arthroscopy; arthroscopic shoulder labral repair; patellofemoral instability procedures; and shoulder instability repair. Patients were stratified by preoperative diagnoses of depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia. Cohorts included patients with ≥1 psychiatric comorbidity (psychiatric) versus those without psychiatric comorbidities (no psychiatric). Differences in costs across groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests, with significance defined as P < .05. Linear regression analysis was used to assess rates of procedures per year from 2006 to 2016. RESULTS: In total, 226,402 patients (57.7% male) from 2007 to 2017q1 were assessed. The prevalence of ≥1 psychiatric comorbidity within the entire database was 10.31% (reference) versus 21.21% in those patients undergoing the 10 investigated procedures. Patients with psychiatric comorbidity most frequently underwent rotator cuff repair (28%), hip labral repair (26.3%) and meniscectomy/meniscus repair (25.0%%) had ≥1 psychiatric comorbidity. Compared with the no psychiatric cohort, diagnosis of ≥1 psychiatric comorbidity was associated with increased health care costs for all 10 sports medicine procedures ($9678.81 vs $6436.20, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of preoperatively diagnosed psychiatric comorbidities among patients undergoing orthopaedic sports medicine procedures is high. The presence of psychiatric comorbidities preoperatively was associated with increased postoperative costs following all investigated orthopaedic sports medicine procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; retrospective comparative study.

Comparing Meniscectomy and Meniscal Repair: A Matched Cohort Analysis Utilizing a National Insurance Database.

BACKGROUND: Meniscal repair leads to improved patient outcomes compared with meniscectomy in small case series. PURPOSE: To compare the reoperation rates, 30-day complication rates, and cost differences between meniscectomy and meniscal repair in a large insurance database. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A national insurance database was queried for patients who underwent meniscectomy (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 29880 or 29881) or meniscal repair (CPT code 29882 or 29883) in the outpatient setting and who had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients without confirmed laterality and patients who underwent concomitant ligament reconstruction were excluded. Reoperation was defined by ipsilateral knee procedure after the index surgery. The 30-day postoperative complication rates were assessed using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. The cost of the procedures per patient was calculated. Propensity score matching was utilized to create matched cohorts with similar characteristics. Statistical comparisons of cohort characteristics, reoperations, postoperative complications, and payments were made. All P values were reported with significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 27,580 patients (22,064 meniscectomy and 5516 meniscal repair; mean age, 29.9 ± 15.1 years; 41.2% female) were included in this study with a mean follow-up of 45.6 ± 21.0 months. The matched groups were similar with regard to characteristics and comorbidities. There were significantly more patients who required reoperation after index meniscectomy compared with meniscal repair postoperatively (5.3% vs 2.1%; P < .001). Patients undergoing meniscectomy were also significantly more likely to undergo any ipsilateral meniscal surgery (P < .001), meniscal transplantation (P = .005), or total knee arthroplasty (P = .001) postoperatively. There was a significantly higher overall 30-day complication rate after meniscal repair (1.2%) compared with meniscectomy (0.82%; P = .011). The total day-of-surgery payments was significantly higher in the repair group compared with the meniscectomy group ($7094 vs $5423; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Meniscal repair leads to significantly lower rates of reoperation and higher rates of early complications with a higher total cost compared with meniscectomy in a large database study.

Direct treatment cost outcomes among patients with medial meniscus deficiency: results from a 24-month surveillance study.

Objective: Meniscus deficiency is highly prevalent in the United States and represents a substantial societal cost burden. The objective of this case series was to evaluate and compare direct costs associated with treatment for acute or degenerative medial meniscus deficiency.Methods: Case series patients (n = 50) received either non-surgical therapy or an operative partial meniscectomy based on clinical assessment by the principal study investigator which included physical examination and MRI. Cumulative 24-month direct treatment costs were compared between non-surgical and operative cohorts. Direct treatment costs were calculated using billing record reimbursements for all medical services administered by the treating institution, and imputed for medical services prescribed by the treating physician but provided external to the treating institution.Results: At study initiation, 33 patients (67%) were treated with non-surgical care, and 17 patients (33%) received a partial medial meniscectomy. By 24 months, average direct treatment costs were highest for patients who received a partial medial meniscectomy at study initiation ($4488 ± $1265) compared to patients who received non-surgical care at study initiation ($4092 ± $7466), although differences in average direct treatment costs were not statistically significant across treatment cohorts (p = .830). Average direct treatment costs were highest for the subgroup of patients who initiated non-surgical therapy but received a subsequent total knee arthroplasty during the study period (n = 2; $32,197 ± $169).Conclusion: Findings from this case series suggests that patients with acute or degenerative meniscus deficiency incur substantial direct treatment costs related to their knee pathology, particularly for patients receiving total knee arthroplasty.

How do the costs of physical therapy and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compare? A trial-based economic evaluation of two treatments in patients with meniscal tears alongside the ESCAPE study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether physical therapy (PT) is cost-effective compared with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) in patients with a non-obstructive meniscal tear, we performed a full trial-based economic evaluation from a societal perspective. In a secondary analysis-this paper-we examined whether PT is non-inferior to APM. METHODS: We recruited patients aged 45-70 years with a non-obstructive meniscal tear in nine Dutch hospitals. Resource use was measured using web-based questionnaires. Measures of effectiveness included knee function using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Follow-up was 24 months. Uncertainty was assessed using bootstrapping techniques. The non-inferiority margins for societal costs, the IKDC and QALYs, were €670, 8 points and 0.057 points, respectively. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 321 patients to PT (n=162) or APM (n=159). PT was associated with significantly lower costs after 24 months compared with APM (-€1803; 95% CI -€3008 to -€838). The probability of PT being cost-effective compared with APM was 1.00 at a willingness to pay of €0/unit of effect for the IKDC (knee function) and QALYs (quality of life) and decreased with increasing values of willingness to pay. The probability that PT is non-inferior to APM was 0.97 for all non-inferiority margins for the IKDC and 0.89 for QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: The probability of PT being cost-effective compared with APM was relatively high at reasonable values of willingness to pay for the IKDC and QALYs. Also, PT had a relatively high probability of being non-inferior to APM for both outcomes. This warrants further deimplementation of APM in patients with non-obstructive meniscal tears. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01850719 and NTR3908.

Meniscal Root Injuries.

Meniscal root tears are an increasingly recognized injury leading to notable functional limitations, potential rapid cartilage deterioration of the affected compartment, and subsequent risk of total knee arthroplasty if left untreated. Repair of these tears is advised when articular cartilage remains intact because both medial and lateral meniscus root repairs have demonstrated favorable results. Recent literature demonstrates decreased rates of osteoarthritis and arthroplasty after medial meniscus root repair compared with partial meniscectomy and nonsurgical management. The transtibial pull-out repair technique is most commonly used and provides a biomechanically strong suture construct with standard and familiar knee arthroscopy portals. Furthermore, repair has recently been shown to be economically effective by decreasing overall societal healthcare costs when compared with more conservative management strategies. This review outlines the evaluation, treatment, and documented outcomes of meniscal root repair, which is imperative to the preservation of knee function and maintaining quality of life.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Isolated Meniscal Repair Versus Partial Meniscectomy for Red-Red Zone, Vertical Meniscal Tears in the Young Adult.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating isolated red-red zone, vertical meniscal tears with either isolated meniscal repair (IMR) or partial meniscectomy (PM) in the young adult using conservative modeling. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov disease progression model with a 40-year horizon was created simulating outcomes after IMR or PM for an isolated meniscal tear. Event probabilities, costs, and utilities were used for the index procedures, and the development of osteoarthritis (OA) and subsequent need for knee arthroplasty were calculated or selected from the published literature. Differences in cost, difference in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost effect ratio were calculated to determine which index procedure is most cost effective. RESULTS: Total direct costs from PM were modeled at $38,648, and the total direct costs of IMR were $23,948, resulting in a projected cost savings of $14,700 with IMR. There was a modeled gain in QALYs of 17 for PM and 21 for IMR, resulting in an increase in 4 QALYs for the IMR treatment group. This results in an incremental cost effect ratio of $3,935 per QALY, favoring IMR as the dominant procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Meniscal repair for isolated red-red zone, vertical meniscal tears was predicted to have lower direct costs and improve QALYs compared with partial meniscectomy over 40-year modeling, indicating isolated meniscal repair to be the cost-effective procedure in the treatment of an isolated meniscal tear in the young adult population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3: economic and decision analysis.

Editorial Commentary: Save the Meniscus? Show Me the Money!

The meniscus is known to play a vital role in the knee joint from, shock absorption to increased contact area to joint lubrication. Repairing a torn meniscus costs money, but it can be even more expensive to perform a partial meniscectomy over the long term. Moreover, meniscal repair may result in an improved quality of life for the patient. One must consider both quality of life and costs when addressing repairable meniscal tears in patients. Repairing a vertical meniscus tear in the red-red zone in a young adult is a cost-effective strategy.